Case law

Breaux v. Kaplan Rice Mill, Inc.

280 So. 2d 923 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 18, 1973

The testimony of the attending physician usually is accorded greater weight than the testimony of another equally qualified physician who has examined the plaintiff only once, and then not for the purpose of treatment. … The medical evidence establishes that the loss of both testicles did not disable plaintiff from performing heavy manual labor.

Turner v. City of Monroe

634 So. 2d 981 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 30, 1994

Once the plaintiff has established a prima facie case of discrimination, it is incumbent on the employer to prove that even with reasonable accommodation, the employee cannot perform the essential duties of the job. … Scope of Appellate Review The trial court's finding of fact will not be disturbed absent manifest error or unless it is clearly wrong. Stobart v. State through DOTD, 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993).

Riser v. H.Y. Bell Memorial Apartments

669 So. 2d 689 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1996

Riser did not “qualify” under either of these exceptions for a two-bedroom unit. Riser requested a downstairs apartment September 28, 1989, from Holden. … We cannot find the jury was clearly wrong in answering the one interrogatory that Riser was not handicapped. See the above quotes from the statute.

Hagedorn Motors, Inc. v. Godwin

170 So. 2d 779 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 1964

Notwithstanding the wife's purchase may not qualify as "necessary" within the contemplation of the applicable codal authority, the husband may nevertheless be held liable if he acquiesces therein, receives the benefit thereof … In essence defendant husband testified he accompanied his wife to plaintiff's establishment to assist her in selecting the vehicle to be purchased.

State v. McCray

12 So. 3d 990 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 13, 2009

On redirect, the state established that the victim’s child told the officer that defendant had fired the gun prior to the physical altercation with Shonda Proctor. … Considering all the circumstances surrounding the question and the overwhelming evidence that defendant committed the crime of second degree murder of Shonda Proctor, the error, if any, was clearly harmless.

Yenni v. Parish Council of the Parish of Jefferson ex rel. Evans

625 So. 2d 301 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 1993

Mortal that home rule entities are bestowed with much broader powers and immunities than under previous constitutions. … The provisions relied on by appel-lees and the trial judge clearly apply to the adoption of the original budget and everyone agrees that the original budget was adopted in conformity with those requirements.

State v. Johnson

461 So. 2d 1273 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 28, 1984

The statement certainly qualifies as an "excited utterance" and is thus admissible. Smith, 285 So.2d at 244-245 . … La.C.Cr.P. art. 821 establishes a standard by which to test the legal sufficiency of the evidence.

Knecht v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

408 So. 2d 1147 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 11, 1981

Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978), the trial judge’s factual findings are not disturbed on appellate review unless the record establishes that they are clearly wrong. … Our review of the entire record indicates that the trial court was not clearly wrong in its findings.

Von Zonneveld Bros. & Philippo v. Cary

86 So. 2d 252 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 20, 1956

The burden of proof shall rest upon the corporation to establish that it has complied with the laws of this state for doing business herein. … An examination of the contract clearly shows the plaintiff gave no warranty, express or implied, and would not be responsible in any way for the results of planting, forcing or flowering of any bulbs or roots which were sold

State v. Pennison

763 So. 2d 671 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 28, 1999

Moreover, even if motel room 148 could qualify as a "residence," it certainly could not qualify as the "private residence" required by La. R.S. 40:981.3(D). … Lastly, the seizure of the defendant and the challenged evidence inside room 148 also clearly survive Fisher analysis.

Davis v. United General Ins. Co.

93 La.App. 3 Cir. 738 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 2, 1994

Clearly, Dr. Richert's testimony did not contradict that of Davis. … However, in our view, the record sufficiently establishes Davis' entitlement to SEB pursuant to La.R.S. 23:1221(3) commencing November 8, 1984.

State v. Waldrop

2011 La.App. 1 Cir. 2363 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2012

A law officer may testify as to matters within his personal knowledge acquired through experience without first being qualified as an expert. Kestle, 996 So.2d at 280 . … Specifically, the defendant contends that the State failed to establish that he understood his Miranda rights or that he was given his Miranda rights.

Patrick Collins, Dawn Collins and Southshore Building Services v. Continuum Restorations services,l.L.C., Guideone National Insurance,company

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 2, 2025

Appellants contend the trial court clearly ruled that Mr. … We further find that the lien waiver in and of itself does not address, clarify, or establish the relationship of the parties in this matter, as the waiver clearly defines “contractor” as inclusive of a subcontractor, and

Landry v. State

495 So. 2d 1284 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 20, 1986

The immunity the legislature meant to provide landowners for recreation activities does not extend, we concluded, to a recreational area within the state's largest urban center. … Having found the plaintiff established a strict liability case, and finding the hole presented an unreasonable risk of harm, we hold the Levee Board is liable for this defect which caused plaintiff's injury.

Crump v. Sabine River Authority

97 La.App. 3 Cir. 1572 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 1998

RThe record clearly supports the application of the “continuous tort” doctrine to this case. … These instances “were developed to insure that recovery for mental injury is allowed only when the injury, and its causal relation to the property damage, is clearly | ^established.” Blache v.

State ex rel. Hart v. Burke

33 La. Ann. 498 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Apr 15, 1881

This suit has clearly for its object the appropriation in favor of a *504 private individual, who claims to be a creditor of the State, of money belonging to the State, which is in the State treasury, and which the State … The United States have always enjoyed the immunity. 9 U. S. R. 433 , 486; 9 L. R. Ch. D. 351. It is useless further to extract from authorities.

State v. Butler

2011 La.App. 4 Cir. 0985 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 3, 2012

While this standard entitles the trial court’s determination to great weight, it will not shield, immunize, or insulate that ruling from an in-depth review. See State v. … Again, the threshold established for a finding of probable cause is neither high nor novel. See Beck v.

Lewis v. Pine Belt Multipurpose Community Action Acquisition Agency, Inc.

139 So. 3d 562 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 7, 2014

all persons causing or contributing to the injury, death, or loss shall be determined, regardless of whether the person is a party to the action or a nonparty, and regardless of the person’s insolvency, ability to pay or immunity … The evidence established that Murphy Enterprises, the entity that provided the carnival rides, was responsible for erecting, operating and dismantling the rides.

Fusilier v. Dauterive

764 So. 2d 74 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jul 14, 2000

Because we have this duty, we must determine whether the verdict was clearly wrong based on the evidence, or clearly without evidentiary support. Id. … Plaintiffs argue that, by failing to find that defendant was negligent, the trial court has accepted a standard of care which immunizes a physician from liability for his negligence, so long as the physician recognizes his

State Ex Rel. Bussie v. Fant

216 La. 58 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 7, 1949

“Only a few examples will be set out in the text, since the cases cited from numerous jurisdictions clearly and amply explain the legal principles controlling the remedy. … He rested his decision on the fact that Section 16 of Act No. 302 of 1910 established the budget system for administering the city’s fiscal affairs and granted the power of making up and controlling the budget exclusively