Case law

Lemaire v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.

793 So. 2d 336 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 2001

CIBA-GEIGY further argues that the evidence clearly established that Lemaire's work was an integral and essential part of CIBA-GEIGY's business of producing chemicals, thus entitling CIBA-GEIGY to tort immunity. … that the finding is clearly wrong.

Devane v. Board of Commissioners

420 So. 2d 1001 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 7, 1982

Krauss Company, 217 So.2d 789, 791 (La.App. 4th Cir., 1969) and has clearly held that a contract of lease may establish a contractual relationship which makes the lessor a principal (statutory employer) within the meaning … Hence, the Port of New Orleans is a principal (statutory employer) and is immune from the third party tort claims of Devane, its statutory employee.

Encalade v. West Jefferson Medical Center Ambulance Service

9 La.App. 5 Cir. 355 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 2009

The court finds that these cases are clearly distinguishable *1118 from the case at bar. … Encalade is not the kind of emergency medical care or medical duty that the legislature sought to immunize from liability under the LMMA.

State v. Foster

2002 La.App. 1 Cir. 1259 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 14, 2003

While the state introduced various documents at the healing, it did not offer any testimony or affidavits to establish that the state did not gain any prosecutorial advantage from the immunized testimony. … In Kastigar , the United States Supreme Court established a mechanism for insuring that the state does not make direct or indirect use of compelled testimony.

Pemella Williams v. the Board of Supervisors, of the Louisiana Community & Technical College Systems

Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 15, 2019

rules that were clearly established at the time the action was taken.” … “First, the court must determine whether the law was clearly established at the time the action occurred.

Jones v. Thomas

426 So. 2d 609 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jan 10, 1983

only a jurisprudentially established immunity) and to employees of employers and principals, except for "liability, civil or criminal, resulting from an intentional act". [2] This court has held, in accordance with our perception … We conclude that since the first paragraph of La.R.S. 23:1032 provides clearly a rule of general tort immunity under which liability for all nonintentional acts falls within the purview of the compensation act, the second

Rodriguez v. Louisiana Medical Mut. Ins. Co.

618 So. 2d 390 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 24, 1993

In the process, the substantive caps and discreet procedures established by the Legislature were particularly detailed. … A second principle is when a statute grants immunities or advantages to a special class against the general public, i.e., when the Legislature grants such rights, powers, privileges, immunities, or benefits against the general

Noyel v. City of St. Gabriel

2015 La.App. 1 Cir. 1890 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 1, 2016

Noyel opposed the motion and filed a motion to strike the defendants’ affirmative defense of immunity on the basis that the defendants failed to urge immunity as a defense in their answer. … Gabriel Police Department’s employees, who arrested and transported Noyel to jail, were clearly engaged in activities which constitute “civil defense,” and thus, according to the Act, are also known as “emergency preparedness

City of Gretna v. Bailey

141 La. 625 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 14, 1917

It goes without saying that a license tax must be uniform on every occupation or business within the same grade and classification established by the statute levying the license tax. … parish, unless that authority was withdrawn from the parish by the Legislature; but the constitutional authority of the Legislature to control the territorial limits of the parochial authority to levy taxes and licenses was clearly

State v. Lambert

93 So. 3d 771 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2012

To follow the defendant’s reading of the law would be to allow any qualified officer, without regard to what that officer was doing, to violate the provisions of 14:95(E) with complete immunity. … In this case, the defendant clearly abused his position as custodian of the Assumption Parish Sheriffs Office evidence vault.

State v. Newton

12 La.App. 3 Cir. 509 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 13, 2013

Defendant argues in brief that “[t]he fact that Joshua Lambert exculpated Sean Newton in a police interview with Officer Chatham [sic] is clearly a Brady violation. … Defendant asserts that Watson “clearly believed that he would receive immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

Binkley v. Landry

2000 La.App. 1 Cir. 1710 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 28, 2001

immunity provided to public entities in Louisiana Revised Statute 9:2798.1. … Act No. 1264 of 1999 clearly added an additional exception to the grant of immunity for loss or damage sustained in a Mardi Gras parade.

Robicheaux v. Caldwell

986 F. Supp. 2d 749 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Nov 27, 2013

United Way of Greater Houston, 607 F.3d 413, 419 (5th Cir.2010) (“[A] motion to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59(e) ‘must clearly establish either a manifest error of law or fact or must present newly discovered … established that he could not reasonably have raised the new matter prior to the trial court’s merits ruling.’”

Reppond v. City of Denham Springs

572 So. 2d 224 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 14, 1990

Louisiana Power Light Co., 435 U.S. 389 , 98 S.Ct. 1123 , 55 L.Ed.2d 364 (1978), the Supreme Court held that the "state action" immunity established in Parker v. … In Dukes this court concluded that neither the government, federal or state, nor any of its subdivisions, are included within the purview of a statute unless the legislative intent is clearly stated.

Ortego v. Landry

98 La.App. 3 Cir. 1948 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 11, 1999

“The affirmative defense of qualified immunity from suit is available to all governmental officials in § 1983 actions,” and “[t]he governmental official has the burden of proving the defense of qualified immunity.” La. … “The standard applicable in determining whether qualified immunity should be recognized is ‘objective reasonableness.’ ” Breaux v.

City of Shreveport v. Schultz

154 La. 899 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Dec 3, 1923

In comparison with furniture stores, dry goods stores, and clothing stores, and perhaps many other establishments, it is difficult to imagine why a junk dealer’s establishment should be proscribed as an extraordinary danger … Immunity granted to a class, however limited, having the effect to deprive another class, however limited, of a personal or- property right, is just as clearly a denial of equal protection of the laws to the latter class

Adams v. Thompson

557 F. Supp. 405 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Feb 16, 1983

While federal jurisprudence under the common law based § 1983 accords a law enforcement officer a qualified good faith immunity from liability, Harlow v. … Good faith immunity is an affirmation defense, Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 , 101 S.Ct. 183 , 66 L.Ed.2d 185 (1980); Gomez v.

O'QUINN v. Power House Services, Inc.

633 So. 2d 707 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1993

The evidence presented in support of the motion for summary judgment as to the character of this property establishes only that the property may encompass approximately 500 acres. … Because there remains a material issue of fact as to whether the nature of this property qualifies it for immunity under the recreational use statutes, summary judgment is not appropriate.

Sewell v. Doctors Hosp.

600 So. 2d 577 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 26, 1992

The Legislature originally defined malpractice principally as any unintentional tort based on health care or professional services which were rendered or should have been rendered by a health care provider to a patient, clearly … La.Civ.Code art. 2322.1, purporting to provide immunity to health care providers from certain strict liability, was added in 1981. [6] Thus, a health care provider's liability may arguably be included under the Act when a

Victoria W. v. Larpenter

205 F. Supp. 2d 580 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · May 21, 2002

Judge Porteous concluded that Plaintiffs right to a non-therapeutic abortion while incarcerated was not clearly established under either the Fourteenth or Eighth Amendments thereby entitling defendants to qualified immunity … However, Judge Porteous did note that the fact that a right is not clearly established for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis does not preclude a finding that the conduct at issue was in fact unconstitutional.