Case law

Thiele v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 3, 2025

each element of the privilege or immunity that is claimed.’”) … July 29, 2009) (“[O]nly ‘reasonably similar’ incidents will be admissible for the purpose[ ] of establishing notice.”)); see also Young C.

Evans v. Lopinto

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jun 24, 2022

municipal liability in an episodic act case, a plaintiff must show “(1) that the municipal employee violated the pretrial detainee’s clearly established constitutional rights with subjective deliberate indifference; and … ™ including from “self-inflicted injury.””°° Evans’ suicide was clearly within the scope of the risk imposed by the duty.

Associated Terminals of St. Bernard, LLC v. Potential Shipping HK Co.

324 F. Supp. 3d 808 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 28, 2018

Based on his background and experience, the Court qualified Captain Campana as an expert in marine maintenance, inspection and safety, and marine surveying and casualty inspection. … It clearly appeared to the Court that Ford was very much opposed to having the suggested surgery, no matter what Dr. Brennan recommended.

United States v. Cocreham

247 F. Supp. 731 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Nov 29, 1965

This was clearly and definitively decided by the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana. There is still another reason why this present suit must be dismissed insofar as Chrysler Corporation is concerned. … Article III, Section 35, of the Louisiana Constitution provides: “The Legislature is empowered to waive, by special or general laws or resolutions, the immunity from suit and from liability of the state, and of parishes,

Williams v. Roche

468 F. Supp. 2d 836 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jan 8, 2007

The moving party bears the burden of establishing that there are no genuine issues of material fact. B. … In challenging a military correction board’s decision, the plaintiff bears the difficult burden of “establishing by ‘cogent and clearly convincing evidence’ that the decision was the result of a material legal error or injustice

Dempster v. Lamorak Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 5, 2021

Norrell established his opinion.40 Plaintiffs contend that a “historian is not qualified to testify as to what anyone should have known.”41 Plaintiffs reiterate their arguments from the Daubert motion that Dr. … extraordinary remedy that should be used sparingly,”59 with relief being warranted only when the basis for relief is “clearly establish[ed].”60 Courts in the Eastern District of Louisiana have generally considered four

Gentile v. New Orleans City Park Improvement Association

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jul 15, 2025

Gentile’s allegations and raised the affirmative defense of qualified immunity in her Answer. See R. Doc. 39 at 9. … However, Sheriff Hutson did not assert qualified immunity as a bar to any discovery. B. Motion to Compel On April 3, 2025, Ms.

Moye v. St. John the Baptist Parish Sheriff Office

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 29, 2022

Plaintiff’s hiring process involved an application, interview, and test to determine that she was qualified. Id. at 1-2. … Disparate Treatment and Retaliation To establish a claim for disparate treatment or retaliation, a plaintiff must first establish their prima facie case for each claim respectively.

Zoller v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co.

356 F. Supp. 3d 598 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Dec 10, 2018

s argument that the intention of the parties was for Schantz to "maintain ownership of the food trailer once it left the tradeshow." 74 Schantz contends that "[t]he sworn deposition testimony of Schantz Manufacturing clearly … Hearsay evidence and unsworn documents that cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible in evidence at trial do not qualify as competent opposing evidence. 107 IV.

Burke v. Lopinto

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 7, 2023

Stat. § 9:2798.1.36 Finally, they argue that plaintiff has failed to establish malfeasance. … To prevail on such a claim, a plaintiff must show “(1) an injury (2) which resulted directly and only from the use of force that was clearly excessive to the need and (3) the force used was objectively unreasonable

Helpful Hound, L.L.C. v. New Orleans Bldg. Corp.

331 F. Supp. 3d 581 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Aug 7, 2018

As noted earlier, lack of registration is not fatal to a trademark infringement claim because "the Lanham Act 'protects qualifying unregistered marks.' " Viacom Int'l , 891 F.3d at 185 (quoting Sugar Busters LLC v. … The geographic element of the mark is clearly connected to the services provided by St. Roch Market in New Orleans. Thus, the mark identifies the place where the services are provided.

Hicks v. BP Exploration & Prod., Inc.

308 F. Supp. 3d 878 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 5, 2018

The party responding to the motion for summary judgment may not rest upon the pleadings, but must identify specific facts that establish a genuine issue. Id. … A jack-up rig qualifies as a "vessel" under general maritime law. See Vickers v. Chiles Drilling Co. , 822 F.2d 535 , 537 (5th Cir. 1987).

Jackson v. Tenneco Oil Co.

623 F. Supp. 1452 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Dec 5, 1985

A contract is a stipulation pour autrui if it clearly reveals that the intent of the contracting parties was to provide a benefit to a third party. Wallace v. Texaco, Inc., 681 F.2d 1088, 1090 (5th Cir.1982). … Furthermore, Halliburton has not established any legal basis to annul its obligation to indemnify Tenneco for Halliburton’s fault.

Martin v. Lafon Nursing Facility of Holy Family, Inc.

244 F.R.D. 352 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jul 31, 2007

District courts apply the “clearly erroneous or contrary to the law” standard of review to non-dispositive rulings by a magistrate. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). … Co., 445 F.3d 801, 803 (5th Cir.2006) (“CAFA broadens diversity jurisdiction for certain qualifying class actions ....”) (citation omitted).

Civic Center Site Development, L.L.C. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Sep 14, 2023

each element of the privilege or immunity that is claimed.’”) … Movant Has Not Established Substantial Need and Undue Hardship When the party resisting discovery carries its evidentiary burden of establishing work product protection from discovery, the burden then shifts back

The Jones Company v. Signature Flight Support, LLC, ET AL.

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jun 16, 2026

Clearly, Mr. Matherne's valuations are admissible.”); Wachob Leasing Co., Inc. v. Gulfport Aviation Partners, LLC, No. 16-60, 2017 WL 5240903, at *5 (S.D. Miss. … It is well established that “an expert may disclose the facts underlying his opinions to the jury.” Id. at *7 (quoting Barnett v. City of Laurel, No. 2:18-cv-92, 2019 WL 5788312, at *5 (S.D. Miss. Nov. 6, 2019).

Reyes v. Family Security Insurance Company, Inc

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Dec 18, 2019

It confirmed that the Reyeses sought damages exceeding the federal jurisdictional minimum: Clearly, if Plaintiffs allege $850,000 in damages and they were only paid $289,396.37 … Even if the email qualified as “other paper,” however, the removal period would not have started to run.

In the Matter of American River Transportation Co., LLC

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jan 4, 2022

When expert testimony is challenged under Rule 702 and Daubert, the burden of proof rests with the party seeking to present the testimony.13 In Daubert, the Supreme Court established … As cited within Petitioners’ brief, “motion[s] in limine [are] used to prevent evidence ‘that clearly ought not be presented to the jury’ from reaching the jury…Similarly, a 12 Fed. R. Evid. 702; see Daubert v.

United States v. Tidewater Marine Service, Inc.

284 F. Supp. 324 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 12, 1968

The practical indicia clearly enunciated in Broion Shoe were based upon criteria well established by lower courts. … Hero, unlike Philadelphia Nat’l Bank , the competitors are speaking on that which they are most qualified to speak.

Holliday v. Goodell

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Apr 21, 2025

court “must sua sponte dismiss [the case] at any time if it determines that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … This is so because the competence of a layman is “clearly too limited to allow him to risk the rights of others.”18 12 Crosswell v.