Cluster 1689914
green
· 202 citation events
across 6 courts.
Showing the 29 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
green
Dustin Boudreaux v. St. Charles Gaming Company, LLC, Caesars Entertainment, Inc., Caesars Resort Collection, … (2026)
Lasyone v. Kansas City S. R.R., 786 So. 2d 682, 689 (La. 2001).
green
Pride Centric Resources, Inc. v. LaPorte (2021)
P'ship, 342 F.3d 416, 420 (5th Cir. 2003)) (citing Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 786 So.2d 682, 691 (La.2001); Adams v. Traina, 830 So.2d 526, 533 (La.App. 2 Cir.2002)). member Robert Autenreith as evidence that FSW did not rely on LaPorte’s audit reports when making decisions.
green
Efthemes v. Amguard Insurance Co (2021)
Co., 786 So.2d 682, 691 (La. 2001).
City S. R.R., 786 So.2d 682, 688 (La.
green
Franatovich v. St. Bernard Parish Government (2012)
That “an accident occurred because of a vice or defect does not elevate the condition of the thing to that of an unreasonably dangerous defect.” Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 786 So.2d 682, 694 (La.2001).
green
Orrill v. Orrill (2009)
“The rule that questions of credibility are for the trier of fact applies to the evaluation of expert testimony, unless the stated reasons of the expert are patently unsound.” Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 2000-2628, p. 13 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 693 (citation omitted).
green
Kibodeaux v. Progressive Ins. Co. (2009)
The reviewing court must always keep in mind that, “if the trial court or jury’s findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse, even if convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, *225 786 So.2d 682, 688 (La.2001).
green
Burmaster v. Plaquemines Parish Government (2008)
Civ.Code art. 2317.1 to require knowledge or constructive knowledge, "the Legislature effectively eliminated strict liability under Article 2317, turning it into a negligence claim." Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 00-2628, p. 6 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 689, fn. 9 ( quoting Frank L.
In Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 00-2628, p. 9 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 691 (citations omitted), the supreme court explained the concept of cause-in-fact, stating: A party’s conduct is a cause-in-fact of the harm if it was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm.
green
Aday v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSPORT. (2007)
In Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 00-2628, p. 9 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 691 (citations omitted), the supreme court explained the concept of cause-in-fact, stating: A party's conduct is a cause-in-fact of the harm if it was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm.
green
Swido v. Lafayette Ins. Co. (2005)
R.R., 00-2628, pp. 14-15 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 694 (emphasis added) (citations omitted).
In Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 00-2628, p. 9 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 691 (citations omitted), the supreme court reviewed the concept of cause-in-fact, stating: A party’s conduct is a cause-in-fact of the harm if it was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm.
Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 786 So.2d 682, 691 (La.2001); Adams v. Traina, 830 So.2d 526, 533 (La.App. 2 Cir.2002).
green
Petre v. State Ex Rel. DOTD (2002)
Id. at 694 (citations omitted) (emphasis added).
citations omitted
green
Darbone v. State (2002)
In Lasyone, 786 So.2d at 691 (citations omitted), the supreme court reviewed the concept of cause-in-fact, stating: A party's conduct is a cause-in-fact of the harm if it was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm.
citations omitted
See Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 2000-2628 (La. 4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682 , 698.
green
Board of Commissioners v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. (2017)
See id. art. 655 (“An estate situated below is bound to receive the surface waters that flow naturally from an estate situated above unless an act of man has created the flow.”). 56 .
green
Willig v. Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc. (2016)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern Railroad, 2000-2628 (La. 4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 690 .
green
Causey v. Winn-Dixie Logistics, Inc. (2015)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 00-2628 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 694 .
green
Dejoie v. Guidry (2011)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 00-2628, p. 13 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 693 ; Katner v. Katner, 09-0974, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/23/09), 28 So.3d 566, 572 .
See, Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 00-2628 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682 ; Rue v. State, Dept. of Highways, 372 So.2d 1197 (La.1979).
green
Lotridge v. Abril (2008)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R., 00-2628, p. 6 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 689 , at fn. 9.
green
Adams v. Rhodia, Inc. (2008)
See Lasyone, 00-2628 at 13, 786 So.2d at 693 .
green
Estate of Francis v. City of Rayne (2007)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City S.R.R., 00-2628, p. 11 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 692 , wherein the supreme court noted that "it is well accepted that the trier of fact is charged with the determination of what credibility it assigns to expert witnesses and then to decide which expert among those testifying that it finds more credible." The photographs showing the resting place of the Francis vehicle between the police cruiser and Officer Garrie's truck were available for the tr…
green
Alaimo v. Racetrack at Evangeline Downs (2005)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City S. R.R., 00-2628 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682 .
green
Bonin v. Ferrellgas, Inc. (2004)
See Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 00-2628 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 693 (when findings are based on determinations regarding witness credibility, the manifest error/clearly wrong standard demands great deference to trier of fact's findings); Henderson, supra (where two permissible views of the evidence exist, the fact finder's choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong).
green
Szewczyk v. Party Planners W., Inc. (2019)
See also Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R ., 00-2628, p. 14 (La. 4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682 , 694 ("[t]he fact that an accident occurred because of a vice or defect does not elevate the condition of the thing to that of an unreasonably dangerous defect").
green
Szewczyk v. Party Planners W., Inc. (2019)
See also Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R ., 00-2628, p. 14 (La. 4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682 , 694 ("[t]he fact that an accident occurred because of a vice or defect does not elevate the condition of the thing to that of an unreasonably dangerous defect").
green
Westley v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2005)
See also, Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern R.R., 00-2628 (La.4/3/01), 786 So.2d 682, 688 .