Case law

Wade v. TEACHERS'RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF LOUISIANA

938 So. 2d 103 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 9, 2006

Her claim was denied on the basis that she did not qualify for disability retirements benefits according to medical evaluations. Following this denial of benefits, Mrs. … It is well settled that a trial court's findings of fact may not be reversed absent manifest error on unless clearly wrong. Stobart v. State of Louisiana, Through Dep't of Transp. and Dev., *109 617 So.2d 880 (La.1993).

State v. Washington

364 So. 2d 949 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 13, 1978

Defense counsel argues in brief that the record does not establish probable cause to search defendant nor an abandonment of the seized narcotics. … The trial court erred in overruling defense objection to trial court's questioning of police officer not qualified as a fingerprint expert, and commenting on witness' qualifications. 5.

Landry v. Avondale Industries, Inc.

877 So. 2d 970 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jul 2, 2004

The overall thrust of the statement of legislative intent in Act 431, § 4, clearly demonstrates that the legislature did not intend that Act 431 adversely affect the rights of survivors in a case, such as the instant one, … Recognizing the distinction between the direct tort action at issue in Cole and the wrongful death claim asserted in Walls , we ultimately held that the 1976 amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1032, establishing executive officer immunity

Henry v. Barlow

937 So. 2d 895 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 9, 2006

The article clearly gives great discretion to the trial judge. He may deny the motion unless `good cause' for the examination is shown. … Henry has not alleged, nor does the record reveal, any evidence which even suggests that the physicians chosen by CLECO are not qualified to perform the examinations.

Miller v. Board of Directors of the Firemen's Pension & Relief Fund

378 So. 2d 973 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 10, 1979

As a general rule, laws are deemed to be prospective in effect unless *977 their language clearly indicates otherwise. Green v. … We note that the quotation adopted by the Supreme Court carefully qualified its position.

Holt v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development

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

Duffour v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co.

359 So. 2d 720 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 10, 1978

this statutory language a workmen's compensation claimant was held totally disabled if he was unable to do work reasonably of the same kind and character as that which his training, education, experience and status in life qualified … But, here, where the record clearly and categorically underlines the fact that Mr.

Miley v. Bogalusa Fire Department

2014 La.App. 1 Cir. 1113 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 6, 2015

Miley’s PSVT condition does not qualify for the presumption under La. R.S. 33:2581 because there is no statutory law or jurisprudence that qualifies PSVT as a “disease or infirmity of the heart or lungs.” … Clearly, this shifting of the burden of proof imposes an onerous task upon the employer.

Hutchins v. Hill Petroleum Co.

609 So. 2d 306 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 9, 1992

As a result of our decision on the main demand, Hill is immune from tort liability. Therefore, Artigue suffers no loss that falls within the scope of the coverage had Hill been named. … The trial judge clearly erred in awarding those damages as there was no foundation whatsoever for the award.

Moolekamp v. Rubin

531 So. 2d 1124 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 16, 1988

R.S. 40:1299.44, appeals a judgment awarding plaintiff an additional $150,000.00 above the $100,000.00 paid by the insurer of her qualified health care provider, Richard L. Rubin, M.D. … Our task is, on the showing made by appellant based on the record before us, to determine whether the trial court's factual conclusions are clearly wrong or whether his compensation award is an abuse of discretion.

Hurst v. Baker Sand Control

94 La.App. 1 Cir. 2463 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 6, 1995

Thus, the appellate court may not set aside the hearing officer's findings in this regard absent manifest error or unless the findings are clearly wrong. Stobart v. … Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder's choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong. Stobart v.

Martin v. Boyd Gaming Corp.

252 F. Supp. 2d 321 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Mar 26, 2003

Hearsay evidence and un-sworn documents do not qualify as competent opposing evidence. Martin v. John W. Stone Oil Distrib., Inc., 819 F.2d 547 , 549 (5th Cir.1987). … Such limited movement, was clearly incidental to TREASURE CHEST’s primary function as a floating, but stationary, gambling casino.

Goldsmith v. Parsons

182 La. 122 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 4, 1935

The suggestion that the maker of the note might pay a lesser sum does not affect the consideration of the note, but clearly involves another and a different agreement, or a modification of the written contract as expressed … Our conclusion therefore is that parol evidence is admissible to establish the defense in this case. 2.

Canter v. Koehring Company

283 So. 2d 716 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Sep 24, 1973

Adams and its progeny have established the following criteria for imposing individual liability, which are generally applied by the First and Fourth Circuits and by some panels of the Second and Third: 1. … Clearly, the answer to the question whether an injured employee can sue a coemployee depends upon the meaning of "third persons" as used in the quoted Section 1101 of the Act. Kimbro v.

State v. James

833 So. 2d 1162 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 2002

The testimony of the owner-victim of the stolen property as to the property’s value is sufficient to establish its value. The owner does not have to be an expert, nor need he be qualified as an expert at valuation. … Tubbs’ testimony was admissible and sufficient to establish the value of the stolen nail gun.

Perkins v. Roy O. Martin Lumber Co.

15 La.App. 3 Cir. 571 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 2016

Plaintiff contended the burden was on the Sheriff to prove he is entitled to statutory immunity from suit under the Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Act. … Further, the evidence establishes MARTCO paid Plaintiff for his labor.

American Mfg. Corp. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.

203 La. 515 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 29, 1942

This broke the feed pipe, and from or through it there escaped into the building on the fourth floor a large quantity of water, which reached the third floor, where plaintiff had its establishment, through stairways and elevator … Plainly stated, the insurance company rests its defense on its contention that the “Hazards Not Covered” clause is clearly, under the admitted facts, an exclusion of liability for the damage to plaintiff’s property.

Banjavich v. Louisiana Licensing Board for Marine Divers

237 La. 467 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Apr 27, 1959

The practical effect of the Act upon the occupation of marine diving is clearly borne out by the record. One of the defendant Board members, Alexander A. … We think this case is clearly distinguishable from the Le Blanc case.

Hebert v. Chateau Living Center, LLC

2002 La.App. 5 Cir. 462 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2002

We find that, in enacting the NHRBR, the legislature clearly intended to establish an independent cause of action for offenses listed in the NHRBR, which is separate from, and in addition to, any medical malpractice claim … We find the legislature clearly intended to establish an independent cause of action for offenses listed in the NHRBR, which is separate from, and in addition to, any medical malpractice claims the patient may have.

In re Medical Review Panel for Claim of Leday

96 La.App. 1 Cir. 2540 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 7, 1997

I also need to know if University Medical Center is qualified under the Medical Malpractice Act. … The Apande case is clearly distinguishable from the facts in the instant case.