Case law

State of Louisiana in the Interest of N.B.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 16, 2022

At the time, he was a year and a half behind on his childhood immunizations and had missed dozens of therapy sessions for his autism and medical appointments for his various medical and developmental disabilities. … clearly wrong ( manifestly erroneous).

State v. Henry

966 So. 2d 692 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 2007

When the direct evidence is thus viewed, the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstances established by that evidence must be sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable … At the habitual offender hearing for the case sub judice, SPD Corporal Tommy Rachal was qualified as an expert witness in fingerprint examination and analysis, and he took Defendant's fingerprints in open court.

Watters v. Department of Social Services

2011 La.App. 4 Cir. 1174 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 14, 2012

In March 2011, the district court, based on this Court’s determination of a benchmark for damages in this case set at $25,000 for general damages, and $10,000 for mental anguish, awarded to qualifying class members damages … “A trial court’s finding of causation is a factual finding that should not be disturbed unless the record does |snot furnish a basis for that finding, and it is clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.” Zimko v. Am.

Triche v. Martin

2008 La.App. 1 Cir. 1220 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 8, 2009

Further, the evidence establishes that Central Hauling knew, or should have known, that its owner/operators, who were residents of other states, were insured under the policy, and that their vehicles were garaged in other … Thus, they clearly did not recover against State Farm’s UM policy. Rather, plaintiffs elected to seek recovery under Cherokee’s UM policy.

MASARIEGOS v. Morgan

5 So. 3d 314 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 13, 2009

Masariegos failed to establish that any lost wages were the result of Dr. Morgan's actions. The trial court denied the PCF's motion, which the PCF urges was error. … Masariegos contends that the jury awards are clearly supported by the evidence.

Mac Duncan v. Dow Pipeline Company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 7, 2007

The written contract between Dow and Cain clearly establishes a statutory relationship whereby Dow is the statutory employer of Cain’s employees. … The record clearly indicates the existence of a contractual statutory employer relationship between Duncan and Dow, which Duncan failed to overcome.

State v. Soler

636 So. 2d 1069 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 26, 1994

Clarence Haydel, a pediatrician, was qualified as an expert in the field of pediatric medicine, with a specialty in physical and sexual abuse examinations of children. … The jury's role is that of ultimate fact finder: the jurors relate background knowledge from the expert to the facts established by evidence at trial and make a determination of the defendant's guilt. State v.

D'Spain v. D'Spain

527 So. 2d 309 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 7, 1988

The record establishes that title to the Coursey Tract was previously owned on the public records by Howard W. … Such a finding by the trial court is not clearly wrong.

State v. Birklett

749 So. 2d 817 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 1999

To establish that his attorney was ineffective, a defendant first must show that counsel's performance was deficient. … Since, therefore, this evidence qualifies as "not otherwise admissible" under La.

State v. Watkins

146 So. 3d 294 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 6, 2014

NOPD Officer George Jackson was qualified as an expert in the field of the examination, analysis, comparison, and evaluation of latent and inked fingerprints. … Retired NOPD Officer Nicholas Molli-gan, testifying on behalf of the defendant, was qualified by stipulation as an expert in the field of fingerprint collection, analysis, and identification.

State v. Bobo

77 So. 3d 1 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2011

When the direct evidence is thus viewed, the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstances established by that evidence must be sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable … We have no reason to believe that a qualified expert in fingerprint identification cannot identify fingerprints by visual observation, nor has the defendant produced any reasons to show that Lieutenant McDonnell could not

Ford v. Lincoln Parish Fire Prot. Dist. No. 1

254 So. 3d 44 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 15, 2018

"A job title alone is insufficient to establish the exempt status of an employee. … The regulations provide, in part, in 29 C.F.R. § 541.700 : (a) To qualify for exemption under this part, an employee's "primary duty" must be the performance of exempt work.

Traci L. Hebert v. Barry's Air Conditioning, Inc.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 31, 2017

is clearly wrong (manifestly erroneous).” … Co., 08-926 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/4/09), 6 So.3d 860 (holding that the treating chiropractor was qualified as an expert to give her conclusion regarding causation). The trial court ruled that Dr.

State v. Dominguez

148 So. 3d 648 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 28, 2014

Specifically, defendant |1fiargues that Juror Evans “was not qualified to serve in this case” because “she was biased for the State.” … Defense counsel established that Lukes was a recovering drug addict.

Deanna Smith v. State of Louisiana Through the Department of Transportation and Development

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 2, 2022

V, § 5 and § 10), this Court has consistently held that appeals are favored in the law and should be maintained unless a legal ground for dismissal is clearly shown. … Nevertheless, we believe Smith’s testimony is sufficient to establish the string’s presence in the construction zone.

State v. Wilkins

11 La.App. 3 Cir. 1395 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 20, 2012

No evidence was presented to establish that Fontenot initiated any threatening act toward Defendant on the night of the stabbing. … Overzealous application of this remedy would infringe ‘the societal interest in trying people accused of crime, rather than granting them immunization because of legal error....’ United States v.

Brown v. Hartford Life Companies

593 So. 2d 1376 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 1992

His specialty is suicidology, and he was qualified as an expert in the field of sociology with training in suicide. He made a report to Hartford after reviewing certain records: Dr. … We do not believe the judge was clearly wrong that Mr. Brown's death was not a suicide but could have been caused by any of several other things.

State v. Landfair

2010 La.App. 4 Cir. 1693 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 20, 2011

In concluding that appellate review was precluded, this Court stated that the review of the record “establishes clearly that trial counsel made certain specific objections at the multiple bill hearing but elected to make … amendment consistently held that under the Habitual Offender Law, second offender status could only result from an offense committed after a first conviction, and third offender status after a conviction which would have qualified

Anne Lowenburg, Judith Lowenburg, Wife of and Tom Lowenburg, Sarah Lowman, Jack Stolier, William B. Taylor, III, M.D. and Barbara West v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 2020

To establish inverse compensation, we must determine whether Appellees have satisfied the three (3) prongs as set out in Chambers. … One way to rebut the presumption is by establishing a contractual undertaking by another to maintain and control the property.”

Rollins v. Concordia Parish School Bd.

465 So. 2d 213 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 6, 1985

The plaintiff, Eva Marie Rollins, brought this suit as the duly qualified natural tutrix of her nine-year-old daughter, Lisa Marie Rollins, (Lisa) seeking to recover damages and medical expenses as a result of the child falling … In this analysis, we are guided by the well-established principle that a trial court's finding of negligence is a finding of fact that cannot be overturned unless the court's finding constitutes manifest error.