Case law

Melder v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

731 So. 2d 991 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 31, 1999

Carriere's testimony clearly indicates that Sears had sufficient probable cause to ask for Mr. Melder's arrest. Because Mr. … In effect, assertion of a qualified privilege amounts to rebuttal of the allegation of malice.

State v. Alexander

351 So. 2d 505 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 20, 1977

Here, the State granted immunity to Herbert John Derouen, a co-indictee, and Mary Arceneaux, one implicated. … Such information apprised him of the nature of the statement to enable him to establish a defense as to that issue.

Stevenson v. International Paper Co.

432 F. Supp. 390 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Apr 29, 1977

Clearly, the uncounseled complainant cannot possess the technical prowess required to avoid procedural pitfalls. … or would have qualified him for the denied position, and an estimate of the amount of requested back pay.”

Hunt Plywood, Inc. v. Estate of Davis

645 So. 2d 248 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 26, 1994

Gaiennie, 305 So.2d 572 (La.1974), where a mother mooted such an exception by qualifying as a *251 natural tutrix under LSA-C.C.P. Art. 4061. … Further, the record does not clearly establish a close relationship between Dylon and his father.

Dulin v. Levis Mitsubishi, Inc.

2001 La.App. 1 Cir. 2457 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 2002

Untruthful Statements An employee has failed to answer truthfully only when he clearly indicates "no" on the employer's questionnaire, denying the existence of a known medical condition. Boh Bros. Construction Co. v. … Mitchell, the WCJ found that Levis established that the injury was to the same part of the spine and that the two injuries merged to cause a more serious disability.

Bond v. City of Baton Rouge

129 So. 2d 887 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 10, 1961

Secondly, defendant Parish maintains it is entitled to governmental immunity herein predicated on the decisions rendered in Duree v. Maryland Casualty Company, 238 La. 166 , 114 So.2d 594 and Stephens v. … It follows therefore that both of said exceptions are clearly without merit.

Rosenkrantz v. BATON ROUGE PSYCH. ASSOC.

657 So. 2d 1353 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1995

The Departing Partner ... shall have the right to retain an appraiser who is qualified to appraise the Property at his expense. … It is apparent from the record of the original trial that the plaintiff failed to clearly establish what, if any, interest he owned in the lease.

Jefferson v. Monumental General Ins. Co.

607 So. 2d 851 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 5, 1993

The trial court found that the amputation was clearly near the ankle joint. … The trial court's opinion following trial, although not as explicit in this regard, may clearly be read as again finding an amputation near the ankle joint sufficient to qualify as one at the ankle joint.

Succession of McCall

140 La. 88 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 30, 1916

expressly declared by the Supreme Court of this state, a deprivation of petitioner’s contract rights, since the debtor’s heirs and his creditors cannot, by the death of the debtor, acquire greater rights, privileges or immunities … Following the precedent established by the decision in the Succession of Thompson, and affirmed in the Succession of Loeper, our conclusion is that the plaintiff had the -right to have the order of sale directing the executor

Desselle v. Guillory

407 So. 2d 79 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 1981

From our review of the record we are unable to say that the verdict of the jury favoring the defendants on the plaintiffs' demands is clearly wrong. … The trial judge correctly allowed such testimony in evidence on the issue of good faith for the purpose of establishing that the statements were made to Mrs.

Romano v. Lomasney

423 So. 2d 787 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 2, 1982

Romano has a cause of action against the executive officers because his injury occurred before the effective date of Act 147 of 1976, (LSA-R.S. 23:1032) which immunized executive officers from an employee’s claims for personal … The duty exists because a reasonably prudent executive officer would establish and enforce such a policy.

Posecai v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

731 So. 2d 438 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 1999

David Kent (Kent), an ex-police officer with a safety consulting firm, was qualified as an expert in criminal risk assessment and premises and safety security. … In addition, the trial court has great discretion whether to qualify an expert witness and has wide latitude whether an expert has the competence, background and experience to qualify. Mitchell v.

Fletcher v. Whittington

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Aug 23, 2022

The qualified immunity doctrine shields prison officials from civil liability “so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … “To be clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Id. at 894.

Southwest Louisiana Electric Membership Corp. v. City of Opelousas

573 So. 2d 1319 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 1991

It is settled that a “majority of qualified electors” means a majority of the qualified electors who choose to exercise their right to vote on an issue. Dresser v. … Considering this established principle, irrespective of the number of electors who participated in all facets of the election, the mathematical majority, as to each separate proposal, is determined by the number of votes

McNamara v. Tube-Alloy Corp.

583 So. 2d 930 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 27, 1991

. §§ 991-997 in order to encourage and promote the foreign exportation of manufactured goods by United States corporations by giving favorable tax treatment to the qualifying “Domestic International Sales Corporations” (DISC … It alleges that the trial court erred in holding that the Department did not establish a prima facie case of Tube-Alloy’s breach of the only standard relevant to imposition of the tax.

Opinion Number

Louisiana Attorney General Reports · Oct 15, 2008

This requires an analysis of whether or not it qualifies as a "public body" under the definition in La.R.S. 42:4.2 (A)(2). … They clearly qualify as a committee under the definition provided above. The definition of "public bodies" in La.R.S. 42:4.2 (A)(2) includes committees created by municipal authorities or city governing authorities.

State v. Jones

332 So. 2d 466 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 17, 1976

Next, defendant objected to the qualifying of a state witness as an expert (Captain Milton Cox). The record reveals that this witness was properly qualified as found by the trial judge (Assignment of Error No. 7). … He asserts that the state failed to establish an adequate chain of custody prior to their admission in evidence. There is no merit to this contention. In State v.

Bickham v. Goings

460 So. 2d 646 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 1984

Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978) we are bound to accept those findings unless the record establishes that they are clearly wrong. Our review convinces us that they are not. Defendants contend that Frank, Jr.' … In Hunnicutt the defendants attempted to elicit similar testimony concerning braking tests from a witness who had not been qualified as an expert at accident reconstruction in an attempt to establish the speed of the plaintiff's

Dobyns v. Univ. of La. Sys.

275 So. 3d 911 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 12, 2019

Dobyns alleged that she suffered from severe allergies due to the many environmental allergens in south Louisiana, which resulted in a compromised immune system. Dr. … A court of appeal must not set aside the trier of fact's findings unless (1) a reasonable factual basis does not exist in the record for the finding and (2) the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong or manifestly

Henderson v. Claiborne Elec.

793 So. 2d 247 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 20, 2001

We start with the proposition that employers and their employees are immune from all tort actions arising from workplace injuries. La.R.S. 23:1032(A). … Clearly, this does not fit the supreme court's definition of an intentional act.