Case law

Wilkinson v. Poag

181 So. 27 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 1, 1938

Poag does clearly show what amounts were paid out for advertising. … We wish also to qualify our former opinion so far as it may seem in any of its expressions to go beyond the decision in McBean v.

Hamilton v. Baton Rouge Health Care

2009 La.App. 1 Cir. 0849R · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 2010

Rather, the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure requires the plaintiff to state what act or omission he will establish at trial. Id. … Although the Center undoubtedly had routine custodial duties regarding plaintiff's mother, in addition to its duties as a nursing home and health care provider, the totality of the circumstances alleged in plaintiffs petition clearly

Byrd v. Pulmonary Care Specialists, Inc.

2016 La.App. 1 Cir. 0485 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2016

Thereafter, if the adverse party fails to produce factual support sufficient to establish that he will be able to satisfy his evidentiary burden of proof at trial, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the mover … However, we decline consideration of this argument since there is no indication in the record that PCS is a qualified health care provider entitled to the limited liability protection of the Louisiana Medical Malpractice

Yoo Hoo of Louisiana v. Vicknair

1 La.App. 3 Cir. 0771 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2001

Vicknair had performed at his maximum level, he may have qualified for a higher physical demand level, but at this time it is unknown as to what his maximum capabilities are. … This standard of review is well established.

Stewart v. Dameron

321 F. Supp. 886 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Jan 29, 1971

These allegations, if true, clearly show irreparable injury. … The respondent here has intimated that the Act only establishes a ‘principle of comity,’ not a binding rule on the power of the federal courts.

State v. Voorhies

169 La. 626 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Dec 2, 1929

The board so created was to be composed of the commissioner of public utilities and four other qualified electors to be appointed by the Governor. … The defendant was charged with and convicted of selling securities, and clearly comes under, and is subject to, the penalty provided in the first paragraph.

Professional Dental Health Network, Inc. v. Advantage Health Plan, Inc.

0 La.App. 5 Cir. 1399 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2001

In the Hearing Agreement Section 2 is titled, “Use of the PDHN Dental Network” (emphasis added) although clearly it should have been called “Use of the PDHN Hearing Network.” … AHP argues that the two varying interpretations of that Paragraph establish its ambiguity.

Schulingkamp v. Ochsner Clinic

813 So. 2d 524 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 13, 2002

a)(i) provides, however: No action against a health care provider covered by this Part, or his insurer, may be commenced in any court before the claimant's proposed complaint has been presented to a medical review panel established … malpractice, LSA-R.S. 40:1299.41(G) allowed the suspension of prescription with regard to certain solidary obligors as follows: ... the running of prescription against a health care provider who is answerable in solido with a qualified

State v. Hicks

607 So. 2d 937 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 28, 1992

establish the identity of the victim. … McCormick was qualified as an expert in forensic pathology and a physician. The record reflects that his testimony was in compliance with LSA-C.E. Arts. 702 and 705(B).

Doe v. ABC Corp.

951 So. 2d 452 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 24, 2007

Appellants argue that this determination was clearly incorrect, and that it did not constitute final agency action. . 12 C.F.R. §§ 7.5000 ; 7.5010; 7.5015; and 7.5217. . … The federal district court remanded the case to state court, reasoning that the fact that a defendant will raise a defense based on federal law is not sufficient to establish federal jurisdiction.

State, Department of Social Services, Office of Family Support v. Gibson

768 So. 2d 714 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 2000

The affidavit shall state in substance: (a) That the affiant is qualified as an examiner of blood or tissue samples for inherited characteristics, including but not limited to blood and tissue types, to administer the test … Sozer’s report clearly indicates that Mr. Gibson’s failure to exhibit this fragment was taken into consideration when the final probability of paternity and combined paternity index were calculated.

Hammond v. Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York

419 So. 2d 829 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Sep 7, 1982

Clearly, Hammond is presently disabled as a result of the removal of a malignant tumor and surrounding muscle from his left arm. … When the doctor comes before a court or a workmen's compensation commission, he comes prepared to answer questions and give his opinion as a thoroughly trained, qualified expert who is supposed to know whereof he speaks.

Louisiana Power and Light Co. v. City of Houma

229 So. 2d 202 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1969

It is either established or conceded that defendant services 290 customers outside its municipal limits. … This latter determination is made in view of what we consider the clearly implied mandate in Ouachita that recriminatory expropriations are to be avoided as a matter of law.

State v. Cortez

687 So. 2d 515 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 1996

Glenn Borne to testify regarding whether immunizations were received by defendant's child and regarding the type of injury incurred by the defendant's son. B. The court erred in allowing Dr. … Accordingly, the state has failed to establish that Ms.

In Re Richard

50 So. 3d 1284 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Nov 30, 2010

The baseline sanction for respondent's misconduct is clearly disbarment. Respondent acted knowingly, if not intentionally, causing actual injury. … I find respondent's forgery of a medical record to assist his client obtain illegal drugs so reprehensible as to qualify him for permanent disbarment.

State v. Daigle

344 So. 2d 1380 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Apr 11, 1977

The judge refused to give defendant's requested special charge number 37 which provided: "Insanity does not have to be established beyond a reasonable doubt. … These provisions insure that juries in Louisiana are selected from a fair cross-section of the parish and that all qualified citizens have the opportunity to be considered for jury service.

Lindner v. Lindner

506 So. 2d 609 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 12, 1987

In resolving the issue of support, the factual findings of the trial court are accorded substantial weight and will not be disturbed on review unless clearly wrong. Teasdel v. … Lindner is a qualified, degreed dental hygenist. She is capable of earning in the neighborhood of $25,000 per year with her professional training.

Opinion Number

Louisiana Attorney General Reports · Sep 3, 2009

Clearly, this is another issue of fact that currently in dispute and contention. Initially, it is important to address this Office's fundamental policy when there are disputed issues of fact. … that an individual's position qualifies as an administrative position. 7 Rather, the employee's salary and duties must be examined to assess whether they satisfy the requirements of the regulations governing the administrative

Carter v. Spears

248 So. 2d 859 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 25, 1971

(John) Mozeke, plaintiffs’ grandfather, had been duly appointed and qualified as tutor of the minors, Booker T. Carter and James D. … This allegation is not correct as the record clearly shows that Mattie Jean Mozeke Spears was duly appointed tutrix for Willie Mae Nelson (Probate Docket 955) and was authorized to sell the minor’s interest in the property

State v. Morgan

2002 La.App. 4 Cir. 1489 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Mar 12, 2003

The question here is whether this decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. … It is patent that the state court’s determination of this issue was not contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law, but in fact follows it. Thus, plaintiffs claim of cruel and unusual punishment fails.