Case law

Virgin Daigrepont v. Wilfred Ducote

Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 2, 2007

.…” “Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, which must be used sparingly by the court and only to compel action that is clearly provided by law.” Smith v. Ruston Fire & Police Civil Serv. … She was otherwise qualified. She is therefore appointed. Although at trial there was lengthy discussion regarding the definition of “block by block,” we need not make that determination.

State v. Marinello

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1260 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 6, 2010

The State also presented expert testimony regarding autopsy and ballistic results to establish that Liz was killed by NyClad ammunition. … Hanhart was neither qualified as an expert nor was the testimony relevant to what he believed or had been told by his own attorney. The passage at issue is as follows: Q.

Arthur Waller v. State of La., Department of Health & Hospitals

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 9, 2011

and, 2) does the record indicate that the finding was clearly wrong? Id. … “A contract is formed by the consent of the parties established through offer and acceptance.” La.Civ. Code art. 1927.

Deborah Hallal and George Hallal Versus Walter H. Eversmeyer, and East Jefferson General Hospital

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 23, 2020

In his oral reasons for judgment, the judge credited the testimony of Clarence Millet, the hospital’s director of facility management, called as a witness by both Plaintiffs and Defendant and qualified as an expert in … A court of appeal may not set aside a trial court’s factual findings absent manifest error, or unless those findings are clearly wrong. Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840, 844 (La.1989).

State of Louisiana v. Marcus Quinn, Sr.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 12, 2010

I note that in Denis the supreme court qualified its citation to Hill when it utilized the signal “Cf.” … To find otherwise would have obviated the necessity for the court to have used a qualified signal.

Whiddon v. Hutchinson

668 So. 2d 1368 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 1996

In this case, we believe the trial court's erroneous instructions clearly contributed to the jury's verdict. … It is well-established that for a tender to be valid the money must be placed into the power of the adverse party.

Jamie Berthelot Bueche v. Travis Joseph Bueche

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 2024

The trial court noted that some debt on the Sandals card was honeymoon debt incurred before the marriage, but clearly for the common interest of the spouses. … In his fifth assignment of error, Travis contends that the trial court erred in not ordering a Qualified Domestic Relations Order ( QDRO) to divide Jamie' s 401K retirement account.

Roberta Broussard v. Stine Lumber Company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 2012

Once a claimant has established those elements, he must then show, by clear and convincing evidence, that he is temporarily totally disabled. Id. … Although this court has sometimes held that repetitive workplace actions that ultimately cause an injury and subsequent disability qualify as “accidents” for 10 purposes of workers

State of Louisiana v. Charles Middleton

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 2019

The defense claimed the prosecutors would be best qualified to testify as to the materiality of the alleged perjury. … Thus, Defendant has 16 failed to establish that the evidence necessary for his defense is not available by other means.

State in the Interest of E.A.D.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2018

Louisiana Code of Evidence article 702 governs the admissibility of expert testimony: A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the … The appellants argue in brief that “DCFS should have, at some point, been required to clearly establish that E.A.D. was properly placed in its custody.”

State v. Dank

764 So. 2d 148 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 24, 2000

New Orleans Police Officer John Palm was qualified by stipulation as an expert in the identification and analysis of amphetamines. … Where the record clearly shows an adequate factual basis for the sentence imposed, resentencing is unnecessary even when there has not been full compliance with Art. 894.1. State v. Lanclos, 419 So.2d 475 (La.1982).

State of Louisiana v. Randy Keith Baldridge, II -Aka- Randy Baldridge

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 2019

Clearly, someone abused the victim. 13 She testified Defendant was the offender. … On cross- examination of Defendant, the State’s counsel established that Ms. Matthews and Defendant kept lubrication in their bedroom drawer.

Deanna Smith v. State of La., Dotd

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 2, 2023

Smith could not prove her negligence claim because the defect she alleged was open and obvious and they were entitled to immunity pursuant to La.R.S. 9:2771. … If the defendant meets that burden of proof, and the plaintiff fails to establish that he or she will be able to establish the breach element at trial, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is mandated

Pat Doland D/B/A Pat's of Cameron v. Acm Game Company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2005

The owners of such qualifying entities are taxed as sole proprietors or partnerships and are personally liable for the losses and debts of such a corporation; the Chapter S corporation is not taxed. … Therefore, as the supreme court in Ashton has stated, the principle of reconduction “has no application whatever when either party has clearly announced his intention not to renew the lease . . . .”

Carla Rachal v. State of La., Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2005

a reasonable trier of fact would not credit the witness’s story, a trier of fact’s findings based on its decision to credit the testimony of one or two or more witnesses can virtually never be manifestly erroneous or clearly … Defendants did not establish that the complaint was true or that a privilege is applicable to Lt. Fannin’s publication of the defamatory report. The LDWF agents who Lt.

State of Louisiana Versus Jontreal A. Fisher

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 23, 2020

In addition to the provisions of Article 162, a search warrant may issue only upon probable cause established to the satisfaction of the judge by the sworn oral testimony of a credible person reciting facts establishing the … We find that the facts in the search warrant affidavit clearly established probable cause that an offense or offenses had been committed and that additional evidence or contraband might be found at the place to be searched

State of Louisiana v. Lester Williams

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 1, 2011

It was established that the cause of death was manual strangulation. … Trant to testify as a bone density expert without first being qualified as one. During trial, the coroner testified regarding the victim’s broken ribs.

Lafayette Parish School Board v. Darlene M. Cormier, on Behalf of Her Minor Child, Jade Cormier

Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 4, 2005

The Pupil Appraisal evaluation found that Jade qualified for special education services in the SEAS program at N.P. Moss because Jade had an emotional and behavioral disorder. … In his reasons for judgment the 3 trial judge clearly stated the basis upon which he made his decision, i.e., “that the undisputed facts support a finding that Jade Cormier has

Timothy Batiste v. Minerals Technology, Inc.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2022

The documentary evidence clearly contradicts MT‟s May 22, 2017, letter stating that it had advised Batiste to return to work performing sedentary duty. … Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1121(A), governs medical examinations of injured employees and provides, in pertinent part: “An injured employee shall submit himself to an examination by a duly qualified medical practitioner

Frank Vine v. Teachers Retirement System of Louisiana

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2019

C. 3401( h)( 2) that is made by an employer to any individual performing qualified military service. … S. 11: 701, et seq., clearly establishes that "'earnable compensation" does not include compensation paid to non -employees. Therefore, Defendants maintain that Mr.