Case law

State v. Gomez

319 So. 2d 424 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 1, 1975

. * * * Defendant has failed to establish that the facts of the instant case demonstrate an abuse of discretion by the trial judge. The prospective juror, Mrs. … Whether a witness offered by one of the parties qualifies as an expert is a question of fact to be decided by the judge.

Blancq v. Hapag-Lloyd A.G.

986 F. Supp. 376 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Nov 24, 1997

The record does not clearly show that Bach was the employee of anyone. It is therefore, unclear whether the LHWCA covered him.” 920 F.2d at 326 n. 5. … Defendants have failed to provide uncontested evidence that establishes that the ladder was reasonably fit for its intended use.

Holt v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP & DEV.

671 So. 2d 1164 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 3, 1996

We can not conclude that these findings are either clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous. … Article 12, § 10 provides a general prohibition against sovereign immunity: Neither the state, a state agency, nor a political subdivision shall be immune from suit and liability in contract or for injury to person or property

State ex rel. Gilmore v. Brittin

52 La. Ann. 94 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 15, 1899

The statute “in force” at that date, fixing the salary of his office, was, clearly, that part of Section 123 of the Act of 1896 which reads: “the several officers under this charter whose salaries exceed said constitutional … It follows that the law “in force” as to his salary when that Constitution came in esse was the one, which, obeying the mandate of the Constitution of 1879, established its amount at $3500.

Succession of Forsyth

21 La. Ann. 367 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 15, 1869

The decedent left an olographic will, which was admitted to probate soon after his decease, and Mills Judson, named as executor, was duly qualified. … The appellant should have resorted to the proof which these articles seem clearly to require in such cases. The sum of five hundred dollars given to Mrs.

Succession of Payne

524 So. 2d 803 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 1988

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR The appellants allege the court erred in invalidating a bequest which was intended to be, and qualifies as, a disposition in trust. … The testator has not established an order of succession, since he did not arrange for the property to leave Henry K. Payne's patrimony at his death and enter the patrimony of his granddaughters.

Womack Bros., Inc. v. Equipment Rental Services, Inc.

399 So. 2d 661 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 26, 1981

Apparently, defendant relied upon the circumstantial implications of the short time between the repairs and the seizing of the pump in an attempt to establish defective workmanship. … These findings are entitled to great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly wrong.

J.L., Individually, and Together With R.P., on Behalf of the Minor Child, R.P. v. Charnell Haymond, University Medical Center Management Corporation and Louisiana Children's Medical Center Dba Lcmc Health

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 22, 2025

Haymond’s actions clearly fall under the amended definitions of “health care” and “malpractice.” As a threshold matter, we note that the effective date of the amendments to La. R.S. 40:1231.1 is August 1, 2025. … The allegations of Plaintiffs’ petition and the evidence presented at the exception hearing establish that Ms.

Russell v. McDonald's Corp.

576 So. 2d 1213 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 13, 1991

A business establishment such as the Southland Corporation owes a duty to its patrons to exercise reasonable care to protect them from injury. … A court of appeal may not set aside a finding of fact made by the trial court in the absence of manifest error or unless it is clearly wrong.

Thomas v. Town of Arnaudville

721 So. 2d 1280 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Dec 11, 1998

While the court referred to the strong evidence of “functional paraplegia,” that is simply another name for the conversion disorder which, as noted above, was ruled out by the qualified psychiatrist and psychologist. … Simply put, plaintiff failed to establish a post-accident physical disability by a preponderance of the evidence. The contrary conclusion by the court of appeal was clearly erroneous.

Schell v. K & K Ins. Group, Inc.

756 So. 2d 546 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 16, 2000

Although Schell argues in part that the court made a finding on an exception of no cause of action, the judgment is clearly one granting summary judgment. … After reviewing the record in this matter, we conclude that the Association bore its burden of proving immunity under the statute for purposes of summary judgment.

Brown v. Beauregard Elec. Co-Op., Inc.

647 So. 2d 668 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 14, 1994

Richey was immune from suit because he was Mr. Brown's employer, and his fault was therefore disregarded. Thus, judgment was rendered against Beauregard in the amounts of $192,308 for Mr. Brown and $38,462 for Ms. … The jury's conclusion otherwise is clearly wrong, and the jury's award of general damages and related medical expenses is clearly excessive. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

Lockett v. STATE, DOTD

869 So. 2d 87 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 25, 2004

C.C. art. 2315.2 clearly contemplates and allows for multiple beneficiaries in each of its four classes. … We find, as did the court of appeal, that this determination by the jury was not manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.

State v. Baldwin

388 So. 2d 664 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 19, 1980

District Attorney Parkerson was called to rebut an inference of immunity to witness Jones. The State did not know his presence was necessary until the immunity issue was raised, and he was not sequestered. … The record does not clearly show whether Baldwin was aware that he had left Ms. Peters to die a slow death.

State v. Morrow

440 So. 2d 98 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 17, 1983

The victim and the witness to the incident in the parking lot clearly testified that Burge alone performed the initial abduction. … The state argues that the facts establishing relator's lesser culpability were before the jury, but that argument underplays the role of advocacy.

McIlhenny Co. v. Bulliard

33 F.2d 978 · District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Jul 23, 1928

(4) Should the prayer of respondent to modify the decree of June 7, 1926, so as to *980 eliminate the qualifying words required thereby in the use of the phrase “Made from tabasco peppers,” be granted? … My conclusion is that the decree went no further than was necessary under the circumstances, and, since it was admittedly violated, the complainant is entitled to such profits and damages as it may have established. 2.

State in Interest of Ardoin

667 So. 2d 1144 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1995

Buxton's testimony does not affirmatively and clearly establish no reasonable expectation exists that D.A. will reform in the future. Moreover, the record contains positive testimony that D.A.' … We conclude the record does not establish clearly and convincingly that D.A. is presently unfit and no reasonable expectation of her future reformation exist.

Fitzgerald v. Compania Naviera La Molinera

394 F. Supp. 402 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jan 15, 1975

The legislative history clearly shows the Congressional intent. … As set forth above, the employer is immune from direct suit by the injured employee, and from indemnity claims by third parties sued by its employees; its executive officers, as fellow employees, are immune to direct suit

Williams v. Leonard Chabert Medical Center

744 So. 2d 206 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 26, 1999

Our review of the photographs indicates that the expansion joint was clearly visible, open and obvious. Although Ms. … Nothing in the analysis undertaken by the majority establishes that the trial court's finding, under the facts of this case, is clearly wrong, manifestly erroneous or lacking an evidentiary basis.

City of Eunice v. Carrier

821 So. 2d 3 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 1, 2002

There are three component parts to establishing a Section 1208.1 violation: (1) untruthfulness; (2) prejudice; and (3) notice. … ' depositions nor the medical records establish the proof necessary to support the employer's claim.