Case law

Banks v. Parish of Jefferson

990 So. 2d 26 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 2008

The act establishes local and regional offices of emergency preparedness. La.R.S. 29:729. … "Clearly, [the parish] was provided with immunity from negligence in its efforts to remedy the effects of Hurricane Lili during the state of emergency absent a showing of willful misconduct. (citing Castille v.

Godfrey v. Boston Old Colony Ins. Co.

97 La.App. 4 Cir. 2568 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 27, 1998

However, in the rare cases which do not qualify for LSA-R.S. 9:2800.1 immunity because the alcoholic beverage vendor sold to a person under "the age for lawful purchase thereof," the court must move to the second level of … General negligence principles Because the immunity established by LSA-R.S. 9:2800.1 does not immunize Waldo's from liability under the facts of the instant case, we turn now to the second level of inquiry for determining

Deumite v. State

668 So. 2d 727 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 28, 1996

The first limitation, upon the type of land or water bottom covered, was established in Keelen . … The language of this statute clearly gives the DWF the recreational immunity afforded to private landowners by La.R.S. 9:2795(33).

State v. Rose

125 La. 462 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jan 17, 1910

The contention that the words “where intoxicating liquors are made or sold” qualify the word “theater” is without plausibility. … If the words quoted apply to theaters and concert halls, they qualify every other occupation and business mentioned in the statute.

Dupre & Son Floor Covering, Inc. v. City of Iota

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1183 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 5, 2010

Therefore, Iota contended, the officers and town were immune pursuant to La. … We need not determine that Iota is immune and that Iota negated one or more of the essential elements of tort; for Iota to prevail, we need only find that it is immune or that the essential elements of tort have been negated

Populis v. State, Department of Transportation & Development

16 La.App. 5 Cir. 655 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 31, 2017

Bd., 06-1223 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1/30/08) ; 975 So.2d 698, 709-10 , stated, the following regarding the application of discretionary immunity: *981 The Louisiana Supreme .Court established a two-step test for courts to follow … that the finding is clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.

Opinion Number

Louisiana Attorney General Reports · Sep 27, 1996

The legislature finds that the practice of nursing by qualified individuals is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of this state . B. … Section 931 provides, in pertinent part, with respect to civil immunity as follows: " A.

Dauzat v. Dolgencorp, LLC

15 La.App. 3 Cir. 1096 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 2016

that the finding is clearly wrong (manifestly erroneous). … [T]he effect of the assertion of the conditional or qualified privilege is to rebut the plaintiffs allegations of fault and shift the burden to plaintiff to establish abuse of the privilege. Smith [v.

Schmit v. Tjitandi

2016 La.App. 1 Cir. 1431 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 2, 2017

Schmit entitled to tort immunity under the LWCA. … In the case at bar, the uncontested evidence admitted for purposes of the motions for summary judgment establishes that Mr. Tjitandi was first hired by Qualified in April or May of 2013.

Johnson-Blount v. Board of Supervisors for Southern University

994 F. Supp. 2d 780 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Jan 17, 2014

To the contrary, Louisiana explicitly maintains its sovereign immunity by statute. 15 *784 Furthermore, the Fifth Circuit has directly held that Southern University and its Board of Supervisors qualify as an arm of the State … This argument is clearly contrary to Kimel: “State employees are protected by state age discrimination statutes and may recover money damages from their state employers ...” 18 Such relief is only available in state court

STROEBEL v. Rainwater

742 F. Supp. 2d 870 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Oct 8, 2010

It is axiomatic that the Eleventh Amendment "bars an individual from suing a state in federal court unless the state consents to suit or Congress has clearly *873 and validly abrogated the state's sovereign immunity." … NOTES [1] This Court has previously held that as an agency of the State of Louisiana, the Louisiana Recovery Authority qualifies as the "state" for purposes of Eleventh Amendment immunity.

Lusk v. Roberts

611 F. Supp. 564 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Jun 4, 1985

Officer Roberts has also asserted the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … There is no clearly established law that the offense is unconstitutional. 13.

Bulot v. Justice

552 So. 2d 1344 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 15, 1989

LSA-R.S. 42:1441.2(A) clearly provides the clerk of a district court is a public officer "named in and designated as parish officials by Article VI, Sections 5(G) [3] and 7(B) [4] of the Constitution ..." … NOTES [1] Article 12, Section 10 of the 1974 Constitution provides as follows: "(A) No Immunity in Contract and Tort.

Chretien v. FW Woolworth Company

160 So. 2d 854 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 1964

The contention is that the provisions of LSA-R.S. 15:84.5 clothed the storekeeper with a qualified privilege affording immunity from a civil action for damages. … The store manager may have had a perfect right to question plaintiff whom he suspected of shoplifting, but the rights and qualified privilege granted by the statute do not clothe the storekeeper with immunity when its manager

Pierce v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York

205 So. 2d 831 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1967

The Hamilton decision clearly disposes of defendant's contention that the 1960 amendment to Article 3, Section 35 did not intend to "waive the traditional immunity of the municipality in connection with the performance of … Defendant avers that certain acts passed in 1960 and 1966 clearly illustrate that specific legislative authority waiving both immunity from suit and liability is necessary in order to file suit against the state or any of

Richard v. Louisiana Extended Care Centers

835 So. 2d 460 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jan 14, 2003

R.S. 40:2010.9 clearly provides for civil enforcement of any violation of La. R.S. 40:2010.8 as follows: A. … LECC is a "qualified" health care provider as it qualified pursuant to La.

Seaman v. Howard

2002 La.App. 3 Cir. 0855 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2002

its entirety, we must find that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the trial court’s finding and that the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong. 2 DPSC’s Duty to Test for HIV and to Inform The trial … When a sexual offender is convicted, the court shall order and direct the offender to submit to a blood and saliva test, to be made by qualified physicians or other qualified persons, under such restrictions Land direction

Lebleu v. Southern Silica of Louisiana

554 So. 2d 852 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1989

Our jurisprudence clearly establishes that the source of contribution is subrogation. Thompson v. Cane Garden Apt., 480 So.2d 373 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1985); Sellers v. … health providers (like the doctor in Ferguson ) who are solidarily liable with at least one qualified health care provider.

TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LOUISIANA v. Blalock

9 La.App. 3 Cir. 459 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 2009

It asserted that the trial court “should establish the boundary line between the lands owned by Intervenor and the land owned by the Tunica Biloxi Indians of Louisiana.” … It is well established that Indian tribes possess sovereign immunity from suit that existed at common law. Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. A & P Steel, Inc., 874 F.2d 550, 552 (8th Cir.1989). The Tribe may waive this immunity.

Grant v. Gusman

District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 31, 2021

Katz, to overcome the qualified immunity defense raised by DOC Defendants, Plaintiff must show: (1) a violation of his constitutional rights and (2) the allegedly violated right is “clearly established” in that … of qualified immunity for a claim against a supervisory official like Secretary LeBlanc, a court “must consider whether [Secretary LeBlanc’s] actions were objectively unreasonable in light of the clearly established law