Case law

Logan v. Westfield Insurance Co

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jan 24, 2020

allegedly “violated the law” by not filling in the word “Lafayette” in his Daily Driver’s Log or any other omissions/mistakes contained in Smothers’ logs.32 Defendants assert that the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) establishes … jury that this accident affected their ability or chances to conceive a child biologically.45 Defendants contend that the Court should prohibit such statements or testimony because Plaintiffs’ fertility or infertility is clearly

Mouton v. United States

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Apr 21, 2020

Bond is qualified in musculoskeletal orthopedic medicine and interventional pain management. Mouton started seeing Bond after the 2014 collision. (Tr. … Because these expenses are not clearly delineated as to injury and cannot be categorized with mathematical precision, the Court will award a portion of those expenses.

White Hat v. Landry

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jun 5, 2023

infrastructure” to include “facilities like refineries, chemical manufacturing facilities, and water treatment plants which occupy visible and discrete land areas often completely enclosed by physical barriers and/or clearly … Specifically, it proscribes: (1) Entering any structure or premises that qualifies as “critical infrastructure” that is “completely enclosed by any type of physical barrier;” (2) Using “fraudulent documents

Jackson v. Mortgage Research Center L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jan 28, 2025

Plaintiff does not allege that Planet Home or any other entity has instituted foreclosure proceedings against him, but the aim of his suit is clearly to escape monthly mortgage payments under the Note and prevent foreclosure … The record establishes that MRC transferred its rights in the subject Mortgage and Note to Planet Home on or about January 1, 2024. (Rec. Doc. 30 at pp. 8–9).

In Re Combustion, Inc.

968 F. Supp. 1116 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jun 4, 1997

If a district court has articulated and clearly utilized the Johnson framework as the basis of its analysis, “we will not require the trial court’s findings to be so excruciatingly explicit in this area of minutiae that decisions … This total does not include the hours of work that remains to be submitted by the independent attorneys representing Class members, whose hours also qualify as part of the lodestar number.

Material Handling Technologies Inc v. Southland Process Group L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Mar 3, 2020

Based on the holdings of Southern States and Imagine, the court found that the payment provision did not contain the “condition precedent” language that would qualify it as a suspensive condition. Id. at 153–54. … Because the Court finds that the payment provision clearly contains a suspensive condition, it is therefore unpersuaded by Material Handling’s arguments that the clause should be read as a term of payment.

Voyles v. Superior Staffing L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Sep 27, 2023

the sending of court-approved written notice to employees,” so that they may determine whether or not to join in the suit by filing their written consent.87 The individuals who filed statements of consent in this suit clearly … The court found: [T]he complaint itself gave them notice, as it brought a collective action under the FLSA, asserted that two persons similarly situated to [the named plaintiff] qualified as Collective

Ashworth v. International Paper Co

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Aug 9, 2024

“Rule 23(a) contains an implied requirement that the class be adequately defined and clearly ascertainable by reference to objective criteria.” … The predominance inquiry “trains on the legal or factual questions that qualify each class member's case as a genuine controversy, questions that preexist any settlement.” Amchem Prods., 521 U.S. at 623.

Alexander v. Dresser L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Feb 18, 2022

Assuming for purposes of this Motion that discovery establishes facts sufficient to establish that GE is potentially liable under a theory of successor liability, the Court now considers the legal sufficiency … The Louisiana Supreme Court has clearly held that the article only applies to conduct occurring between September 4, 1984, and April 16, 1996. Anderson v.

Epperson v. Dresser L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Feb 18, 2022

Assuming for purposes of this Motion that discovery establishes facts sufficient to establish that GE is potentially liable under a theory of successor liability, the Court now considers the legal sufficiency … The Louisiana Supreme Court has clearly held that the article only applies to conduct occurring between September 4, 1984, and April 16, 1996. Anderson v.

Emerald Land Corp v. Trimont Energy (BL) L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 13, 2021

Sparks is not qualified to offer an expert opinion pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Mr. … ° Rule 56 “mandates the entry of summary judgment... against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the 25 Fed. R. Civ.

Self v. B P X Operating Co

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Mar 31, 2022

. §§ 30:9(B), 30:10(A)(1).2 Once a unit has been established, the Commissioner may appoint an operator to extract oil and gas from a reservoir. See id., citing Hunt Oil Co. v. … A controlling issue of law is clearly presented in both the instant motion and in the recently decided motion for reconsideration in Allen Johnson, et al. v.

I F G Port Holdings L L C v. Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal District

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 26, 2024

Although case law regarding what qualifies as a final proceeding under Rule 60(b)(6) is admittedly sparse, the Fifth Circuit considered whether a voluntary dismissal without prejudice qualified as a final proceeding in … See Snarr, 2023 WL 4237095, at *10 (stating that recusal is only required when “the stated facts establish a personal relationship of such magnitude that the judge cannot be impartial”).

Thibodeaux v. J M Drilling L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 28, 2021

It qualifies as a substantial factor because, absent JM Drilling’s negligence, the sinkhole would not have formed, and Thibodeaux would not have been injured. … undisputed facts thus establish that JM Drilling’s negligence in rupturing the sewer line was “a substantial factor in producing” Thibodeaux’s injuries.

Thibodeaux v. J M Drilling L L C

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 23, 2021

It qualifies as a substantial factor because, absent JM Drilling’s negligence, the sinkhole would not have formed, and Thibodeaux would not have been injured. … Clearly, this was not residential construction as that term is used in the Residential Contracting-Construction Defect Exclusion.”” 57 ECF No. 296 at 14.

Vallecillo v. McDermott Inc

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Sep 9, 2025

Gaudet and Bardwell did not clearly recall being notified about a stuck shackle, but acknowledged that stuck shackles are not uncommon in the kind of work being done. Ex. D1; Ex. J48 at 71. 33. … “Even under the Jones Act, however, a party must establish more than mere ‘but for’ causation.” Id. (citing Gavagan v.

White Hat v. Landry

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Mar 28, 2024

Specifically, it proscribes: (1) Entering any structure or premises that qualifies as “critical infrastructure” that is “completely enclosed by any type of physical barrier;” (2) Using “fraudulent … The Fifth Circuit has described “mootness” as “the doctrine of standing in a time frame.”109 In other words, a plaintiff must not only establish that he or she has standing under Article III at the commencement

White Hat v. Landry

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Apr 5, 2024

Specifically, it proscribes: (1) Entering any structure or premises that qualifies as “critical infrastructure” that is “completely enclosed by any type of physical barrier;” (2) Using “fraudulent … The Fifth Circuit has described “mootness” as “the doctrine of standing in a time frame.”109 In other words, a plaintiff must not only establish that he or she has standing under Article III at the commencement

White Hat v. Landry

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · May 5, 2021

on specially designated and protected property.”10 Under the Amended Statute, however, critical infrastructure now includes 125,000 miles of pipelines, which run through private and public spaces and are not visible or clearly … Unlike the other Organization Plaintiffs, these plaintiffs allege broad protest activities that may include protests “in the vicinity” of pipelines that may qualify as a critical infrastructure under La. R.S. 14:61.

Olive v. Tubbs

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Sep 29, 2023

Courts in this circuit have reduced (and sometimes eliminated) requested hours for “hours billed for reading/editing the work of other well-qualified attorneys.” Globe Glass & Mirror Co, v. Brown, No. CIV. … This affidavit established that attorneys in this area generally bill in the range of $200.00 to $300.00 per hour, “particularly those with more than 20 years of experience.” Id.