Case law

Justin H. Moore v. Centralized Management Services, LLC and Episode Solutions, LLC

Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 4, 2021

Responding to Moore’s inquiry regarding his bonuses, Eadie explained to Moore, in a November 6, 2017 letter, that “your work time with the company did not qualify you for a bonus. … The evidence presented at trial clearly reveals that Moore produced no work after September 20, 2021.

Gremillion v. Rinaudo

240 So. 2d 237 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 1970

The Supreme Court also noted that since appeals are favored in law, they should be maintained unless a legal ground for dismissal is clearly shown, citing Portier v. … Qualified registered voters were not permitted to vote due to omission from the voting rolls."

State v. Harris

540 So. 2d 1226 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 15, 1989

Rogers, the canine officer, established how he tracked the suspect's path to the house where he was found. … Harris' attorneys defended him by attempting to establish an alibi.

Freeland v. Pierce

679 So. 2d 546 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Aug 21, 1996

Underpinning this rule is the desirability of ending litigation and the undesirability of changing the child’s established living mode except for imperative reasons. Bergeron, supra. … Directly put, the evidence does not establish that appellant is an unfit mother.

C & C Energy, L.L.C. v. Cody Investments, L.L.C.

41 So. 3d 1134 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jul 6, 2010

The principles underlying our holding today are well-established. … We clearly emphasized the principle that “notice is a constitutional requirement, and want 18of notice is fatal to a tax sale.” Id., pp. 8-9, 925 So.2d at 1177 (citing Adsit v. Park, 144 La. 934 , 81 So. 430 (1919)).

Carrier v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

186 So. 2d 445 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 9, 1966

The written reasons for judgment filed by our esteemed colleague of the lower court clearly indicate he entertained considerable doubt concerning the occurrence of the alleged accident. … Plaintiff did not produce the testimony of the experts who were probably best qualified to assist the court in resolving the factual issues involved herein, namely, the physicians at the two public institutions in which plaintiff

Leeman v. Triple E Transport, Inc.

99 La.App. 4 Cir. 0229 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 1999

Where two permissible views of the evidence exits, a factfinder’s choice between the two views can never be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong. See Banks v. … Heinen testified that Lee-man, along with several other members of the hospital staff, signed a Chain of Custody and Control form, which indicated that the' drug screen was authorized, and that qualified medical personnel

Chaisson v. Philip Services Corp.

917 So. 2d 514 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 2, 2005

The WCJ found the employer was unable to establish that claimant was guilty of fraud pursuant to La.R.S. 23:1208.1. … Clearly, this testimony supports claimant's assertion that he informed Nassar of the accident.

Domino v. CROWLEY CITY POLICE DEPT.

10 La.App. 3 Cir. 1244 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 25, 2011

The remaining issues were fixed for trial, and the court subsequently granted a directed verdict dismissing Nickel and Deville, finding they were judicially immune from suit for the conduct alleged. … P. art. 220] The test precludes “clearly inappropriate force.” LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 220, Official Revision Comment(b). The use of force when necessary to make an arrest is a legitimate police function.

Abadie v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

784 So. 2d 46 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2001

Plaintiffs argue that post-1976 evidence was relevant to establish intentional tortious conduct of the Avondale Executive Officers, for which they are not immune to prosecution under R.S. 23:1032 as amended. … The record establishes that the parties agreed, pre-trial, that these suits alleged negligent conduct and not intentional conduct from any time period. Thus, post 1976 evidence was clearly irrelevant and not at issue.

Alexander v. Lafayette

District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Sep 24, 2021

'*” The Individual Defendants have expressively raised the applicability of qualified immunity in their motions to dismiss.!”8 Whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity turns on a two-prong inquiry. … ° Second, was that right “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct?'?

State v. Roy

220 La. 1017 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 18, 1952

After trial on the merits, the jury which tried her rendered a qualified verdict of guilty and on June 8, 1951 she was sentenced to the State Penitentiary for life. … The per curiam of the trial judge on this bill states that the witness was permitted to testify as to what conditions the gun in question could be fired in a cocked position which, he states, was clearly rebuttal testimony

State v. Welcome

458 So. 2d 1235 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 14, 1984

However, the significant time lapse between the initial scuffle and the shooting of the aunt's friend (for which the jury recommended life) clearly qualifies this offense as first degree murder. … Under these circumstances, the second killing also clearly qualifies as first degree murder. [16] The sentencing recommendations clearly indicate that the jury perceived a distinction *1255 between the two killings.

Brashers v. Shreveport Ambulance Service, Inc.

424 So. 2d 409 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 1982

On October 1, 1980, the corporation became qualified and began operating as a full service ambulance company with an increased volume of calls and the acquisition of additional equipment. Mrs. … The trial court concluded that some of the checks clearly established a corporate expenditure because of the description of the payee, the explanation on the check, and the unlikelihood that such an expenditure would normally

Gates v. Hanover Insurance Company

218 So. 2d 648 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 1969

Sheriff Rowley filed an exception to the court's jurisdiction based on his immunity from suit, and an exception of no right or cause of action directed to the plaintiff's petition and to the third party petition. … In denying recovery the Court applied the established principle in our jurisprudence, and said: "In discussing this point it must be borne in mind that no liability attaches to the defendant sheriff under the doctrine of

Danos v. Waterford Oil Company

225 So. 2d 708 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 2, 1969

Initially we note it clearly contemplates a prior administration by an executor or administrator. Here there has been no such previous administration. … Next we observe the provisions of the statute to be clearly and unmistakably permissive, not mandatory.

Gotte v. Magnum Elec. Co., Inc.

628 So. 2d 1168 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 1993

To qualify for supplemental earnings benefits (SEB), a claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a work-related injury resulted in his inability to earn wages equal to 90% or more of his wages at the time … Clearly, we find that the physical therapy constituted related medical treatment for which Magnum and Cigna are liable.

King Cold Storage Warehouse, Inc. v. City of New Orleans

522 So. 2d 169 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 10, 1988

LSA-R.S. 38:2216(C)(2)(a) provides: For purposes of this Subsection, "responsible bidder" shall mean a contractor or subcontractor who has an established business and who has demonstrated the capability to provide goods and … Clearly, their knowledge and experience of 17 years qualify them as a responsible contractor pursuant to this subsection of the statute.

Williams v. DiVittoria

777 F. Supp. 1332 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Nov 5, 1991

Second, defendant urges that there is no genuine issue of material fact on the issue of whether defendant is entitled to qualified immunity from plaintiff’s § 1983 claims, and whether defendant acted with malice and without … One can establish malice in at least four ways.

State v. Ward

246 La. 766 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jul 1, 1964

Each, represented by qualified and competent counsel of his choice, pleaded not guilty, and the case was fixed for trial for April 1. … Counsel for the accused relies solely on the testimony of one of the grand jurors, but his testimony clearly shows that he was confused about the meaning of the term “deliberations” as used in the statute.