Case law

Alleman v. Louisiana, Department of Economic Development

698 F. Supp. 2d 644 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Mar 17, 2010

of disparate treatment claims brought under Title VII, § 1981 and the LEDL. 7 To establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, the plaintiff must demonstrate that she is: (1) a member of a protected class; 8 (2) qualified … that this Amendment bars an individual from suing a state in federal court unless the state consents to suit or Congress has clearly and validly abrogated the state’s sovereign immunity.

Fetty v. The Louisiana State Board of Private Security Examiners

District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Jul 8, 2019

“In determining whether an official enjoys immunity, we ask (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a violation of a clearly established federal constitutional or statutory right and (2) whether the official's actions … “ ‘Qualified immunity attaches when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Kisela v.

State ex rel. Saunders v. Kohnke

109 La. 838 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jan 19, 1903

But this implication, to be sufficient, must clearly evince or express the intention to establish or constitute a body politic or corporate; that is, to invest it with corporate powers and privileges. … expressed or necessarily implied purpose is as clearly void as if in express terms forbidden.

Jones v. Gaines

978 So. 2d 522 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 2008

(4) Have defendants conclusively established their right to the affirmative defense of immunity under La. R.S. 9:2798.1? … R.S. 9:2800.2 establish the conditions and obligations for the release of patients like Gaines and the duty of health care providers of these patients to warn "clearly identified victim or victims" of a significant and "specific

City of Alexandria v. CLECO CORP.

735 F. Supp. 2d 448 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Aug 3, 2010

R.S. § 2798.1(B) provides a form of qualified immunity to public officers: “Liability shall not be imposed on public entities or their officers or employees based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise … Moreover, the Louisiana Supreme Court limited a subsequent case from the same circuit, which held that “Chaffin clearly establishes that, in some circumstances, a tort action may lie for unwarranted interference by an attorney

Massie v. Cenac Towing Co., Inc.

796 So. 2d 14 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 2001

The liability of Cenac and its insurer was established by summary judgment and is not an issue. … Finally, Cenac argues that it was error for the trial court to qualify Perry as an expert.

Keisha Henry and Cedric Brumfield, III v. Richard Bell, Sr. and Darren Lombard in His Capacity as Clerk of Criminal Court

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 25, 2023

The court finds that Plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie case establishing that Defendant had violated paragraph 9 on his Notice of Candidacy (Qualifying Form). … So.3d 1055, 1058-59, this Court outlined the standard of review and burden of proof in election suits, as follows: Appellate courts review a trial court’s findings of fact under the manifest error or clearly

State v. Clark

340 So. 2d 208 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 14, 1976

Ordinarily, a witness must be qualified before he gives an expert opinion, La.R.S. 15:466. … Hence, the ruling herein allowing Gibbs to be interrogated concerning his prior arrests was clearly error.

Basil Fisher v. Catahoula Parish Police Jury

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2015

Mizzel, and Frankie Tolar clearly set forth sufficient facts to establish Fisher was working as a trustee laborer for the Police Jury at the time of the accident. … Further, the immunity from liability granted to governmental entities established in La.R.S. 15:708(H) is not all encompassing.

Opinion Number

Louisiana Attorney General Reports · Apr 1, 2008

The Smoke-free Act attempts to clearly define these exempted areas and further provides penalties for violating certain provisions of the act. … Accordingly, even though an establishment may sell or offer for sale food to the public, guests, or employees, it may still qualify as a bar *Page 5 under the Smoke-free Act.

Shelton v. Neal

423 So. 2d 783 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 1, 1982

The accident occurred before the effective date of Act 144 of 1976 which immunized executive officers from claims for negligence of fellow employees. … Moreover, his experience and training qualified him to take Neal’s place as a supervisor in Neal’s absence.

Cryer v. City of Alexandria ex rel. Alexandria Police Pension & Relief Board

425 So. 2d 900 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 10, 1983

We cannot subscribe to the argument that the language “while in the performance of his duties” means no more than a temporal relationship between the disability and the job, or that plaintiff need establish no more than that … However, this was clearly an inadvertence or typographical mistake, since a colloquy in the record between court and counsel indicates that the court recognized plaintiff had an interest in the right asserted and that he

American Bank & Trust Co. v. Price

688 So. 2d 536 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 3, 1996

The conclusion that Matthews’ appraisal was an invalid, defective appraisal because he was “not qualified” is clearly wrong. Especially is that conclusion clearly wrong in the light of the appraisal of Mr. … The de minimus difference in the two appraisals required the sheriff to average the two, as the statute clearly directs.

State, Department of Transportation & Development v. Wagner

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 644 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 9, 2009

wrong standard, and factual findings should not be reversed absent manifest error or unless they are clearly wrong. … “It is well established that the current use of the property is presumed to be the highest and best use and the burden of overcoming that presumption by proving the existence of a different highest and best use based on a

Becnel v. Citrus Lands of Louisiana, Inc.

429 So. 2d 459 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 4, 1983

Hugh McCurdy as a witness and qualified him as an expert surveyor. He reviewed the land survey of James S. Webb which was dated February 10, 1928. … The record clearly reveals that the requirements of the statute were not met.

Martinez v. Reynolds

398 So. 2d 156 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 15, 1981

In its opinion, the Court stated: "The employment relationship between the deputy sheriff and the State is established, for the reasons stated in the prior opinion of this court. Wambles v. … Nevertheless, we believe that that was clearly the intent of the legislature.

State v. Edwards

106 La. 674 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 15, 1901

The reasons assigned by the judge a quo for overruling these objections are, in substance; that the confessions were voluntary and were not induced by any promises of immunity from punishment, or hope of reward, or threats … Though this is the case, the ruling of a judge of first instance on a question of this character should not be disturbed, unless clearly erroneous.

Dufrene v. Avondale Industries, Inc.

795 So. 2d 456 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 22, 2001

The wrongful death claims were dismissed on March 16, 2001, pursuant to applicable law relative to Avondale’s workers’ compensation immunity at the time of the decedent’s death. See Walls v. … Our interpretation creates no contradiction; the wording of C.C.P. art 801 clearly shows that C.C. art. 2315 beneficiaries are to be given preference in the definition of “legal successor.” In the instant case, La.

Cooper v. Public Belt Railroad

2003 La.App. 4 Cir. 2116 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 6, 2004

The testimony at trial also establish that the crew continued to pay attention to this lady even after they passed her. [Emphasis added.] … Puryear’s expertise that qualifies him to express an *546 opinion regarding what the train crew was looking at the time of the accident. It was Mr.

International Paper Co. v. Hilton

6 La.App. 3 Cir. 895 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 15, 2006

Id. at 574. 1 Additionally, we quoted the trial court’s judgment, which stated: Obviously, the primary purpose of RS 33:130.15 and 130.16 is not to offer tax incentives or to grant immunity or exemptions from taxation, but … The appellate court disagreed stating: Clearly, the residents of an unincorporated area do not have greater rights than the residents of a municipal corporation.