Case law

State v. Maise

167 So. 3d 608 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 30, 2015

done the defendant, and, unless such is shown to have been the case the motion IfiBhall be denied, no matter upon what allegations it is grounded. 9 A defendant seeking a new trial based on newly discovered evidence must establish … defendants’ arrests — well before trial— and clearly did not amount to an admission she committed perjury in her testimony at a trial that had yet to take place.

Gannett River States Pub. v. Hussey

557 So. 2d 1154 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1990

However, the Webb court clearly recognized the existence of a "personnel exception" to the public records doctrine. … Obviously, it is in the best interest of the city to have the largest possible pool of qualified applicants.

State ex rel. L.R.

2010 La.App. 4 Cir. 1212 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 2010

Lewis stated that when he turned around, he clearly recognized L.R. Mr. Lewis jumped up and ran behind his truck, and L.R. began to pursue him, but then turned and fled. Mr. … The Louisiana Supreme Court has recognized the well-established principle that Sixth Amendment confrontation errors are subject to harmless error analysis. State v.

Law v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HOSPITALS

989 So. 2d 871 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 13, 2008

We further note that LDHH agrees that states can impose more liberal standards than the eligibility requirement established by the federal statute. … Regardless of her status, Law clearly receives a "benefit" under Title XIX of the Social Security Act.

Elie v. Karst

594 So. 2d 929 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 1992

Rather, I would adhere to that well-established practice of interpreting laws governing the conduct of elections liberally “so as to promote rather than defeat candidacy.” Dixon v. … Therefore, he clearly had been admitted to practice law for more than five years at the time that he qualified.

Rosella v. DeDe's Wholesale Florist

607 So. 2d 1055 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 1992

In our view, the evidence which we previously briefly summarized does not clearly and convincingly establish that plaintiff was unable during the period aforesaid to engage in any employment or self-employment as a consequence … Clearly, during this period plaintiff's pain was not so substantial as to be disabling.

Valley v. American Ins. Co.

510 So. 2d 449 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 26, 1987

Pope testified that before the accident in question plaintiff had passed an exam qualifying her to become a "patient care technician", a step higher than a nurse's aide. … We feel the trial court's finding to the contrary was clearly wrong.

Vincent v. Ryder Enterprises, Inc.

352 So. 2d 1061 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 1977

The court rejected this argument, stating: "The record clearly establishes that the hauling of acid was a function which Witco required for the successful operation of its business but was also one which they did not desire … Even conceding, arguendo, that the Court's decision in Broussard, supra, that R.S. 23:1061 grants tort immunity to the principal was dictum, we find that the rule expressed in the majority opinion reflects clearly established

Haley v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. of W. Feliciana Parish

321 F. Supp. 3d 670 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · May 30, 2018

the 'best qualified' candidates clearly implies that it selected [the successful candidates] because they were better qualified than [plaintiff]." 92 Because the Defendants in the case at bar have proffered the identical … Pepper's proffered explanation is false or 'unworthy of credence;' or (2) Burrell could try to prove that he is 'clearly better qualified' *682 than the person selected for the position.' 107 The plaintiff in Burrell presented

Davis v. Southern Sav. Ass'n

557 So. 2d 1011 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 15, 1990

for directed verdict because Davis clearly established that the words transmitted by Southern were libelous per se and Southern should have been required to meet its burden under La.R.S. 13:3602. … Community Center Credit Corporation, 359 So.2d 1048 (La.App. 4th Cir.1978), this Court held that a qualified privilege exists between an employer and the state OES.

Estate of Messina v. STATE, DHH

867 So. 2d 879 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 3, 2004

They therefore argue that the 1999 Deed was not executed to establish Medicaid eligibility. … Had the ownership value not been transferred prior to her application, her eligibility for LTC vendor payments (less than $2000 in resources) would clearly have been denied.

Cacibauda v. Gaiennie

305 So. 2d 572 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 13, 1974

Therefore, he is clearly liable under Canter. With respect to L. R. … Under the Canter case, Stevens clearly is not liable. We also conclude the plaintiffs did not establish a prima facie case of actionable negligence against Wayne Snelson.

Opinion Number

Louisiana Attorney General Reports · Jan 27, 1995

Thibodaux General Hospital proposes to contribute $60,000 to Nicholls State University for the purpose of establishing an endowed chair in oncology nursing. … The Louisiana Constitution, at Article VII , Section 14 (C), qualifies its prohibition on the donation of public property by providing: For a public purpose, the state and its political subdivisions or political corporations

Murphy v. 1st Lake Properties, Inc.

12 La.App. 5 Cir. 649 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 23, 2013

clearly wrong. … Defendants objected on the basis that none of plaintiffs treating physicians who would testify were specialists or experts in allergies or immune disorders, or in the MELISA test and its methodology.

Hall v. Louisiana

974 F. Supp. 2d 957 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Sep 30, 2013

Judge Berrigan further reasoned that under the framework established by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Roberts , a Louisiana state court does not qualify as a juridical person, and thus lacks the capacity to be sued. … "Section 1983 imposes liability on anyone who, under color of state law, deprives a person 'of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.’

Moore v. LaSalle Corrections Inc

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Oct 30, 2020

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”

French v. Bach

26 La. Ann. 731 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 15, 1874

The ruling was clearly wrong, the testimony being exclusively parol, was inadmissible to destroy Me-Michael’s title and establish title in Spiller, who had no vestige of title. … This alleged sale, with all its surroundings, we cannot regard as having been made in good faith, and therefore that it is not covered by the immunity granted by article 149 of the constitution of this State.

Kilbourn v. Pennebaker

23 La. Ann. 700 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jul 15, 1871

Four of these witnesses, it seems clearly established, lived “out of the place” where the testament was signed; thatis, that they were residents of the parish of Madison, on the opposite side of the Bayou Mason from Warsaw … The residence of the other witness is not so clearly fixed.

Freeport-McMoran Energy, LLC v. Cedyco Corp.

2010 La.App. 4 Cir. 0367 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 5, 2011

“We review the trial court’s ruling under the manifest error or clearly wrong standard, in which the trial court will not be reversed in the absence of clear error. … Clearly, Mr. Mascarenhas did not have the personal knowledge to produce the figures presented in the proposals of Estis, Kostmayer and Rennies. Thus, the only admissible testimony of Mr.

Fauntleroy v. Rainbow Marketers

4 La.App. 3 Cir. 926 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 10, 2004

The relevant sections of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act generally state that upon the occurrence of a “qualifying event,” a qualified beneficiary of a group health care plan is entitled to elect continued … The termination of a covered employee’s employment qualifies as one of the listed qualifying events. 29 U.S.C. § 1163 (2003).