5 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Louisiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Daniels v. Witco Corp.green2 sentences2009See Daniels v. Witco Corp., [ 03-1478 (La.App. 5 Cir. 6/1/04) , 877 So.2d 1011 ].” In addition, the trial judge stated that “Additionally, the Court, through evidence already offered and evidence to be offered at a future hearing focusing on a refinement of the three drain basins, is satisfied that a class can be defined objectively and determine the constituency of that class for the purpose of any judgment that may ultimately be rendered in this case.” After the parties received the trial court’s reasons for judgment, the parties did not agree on the proper wording of the judgment. 2009See Daniels v. Witco Corp., [ 03-1478 (La.App. 5 Cir. 6/1/04) , 877 So.2d 1011 ]." In addition, the trial judge stated that "[a]dditionally, the Court, through evidence already offered and evidence to be offered at a future hearing focusing on a refinement of the three drain basins, is satisfied that a class can be defined objectively and determine the constituency of that class for the purpose of any judgment that may ultimately be rendered in this case." After the parties received the trial court's reasons for judgment, the parties did not agree on the proper wording of the judgment. | 1 | 1 |
Crier v. Whitecloudgreen1 sentence1989Id. at 313 (Dixon, J., dissenting). [3] The plaintiff in Williams v. Kushner, 524 So.2d 191 (La.App. 4th Cir.1988), writ granted, 526 So.2d 785 (La.1988) apparently followed Sibley procedures in challenging the constitutionality of La.R.S. 40:1299.39's limitation of the damage award available in actions against qualified health care providers, and that case is now pending in this Court after briefing and oral argument. [1] Because the exception was tried on the pleadings and arguments and the petition adequately alleges the doctor knew the information contained in the pathology report, it is n | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Nix v. Williams
green
2 sentences2025Amant, Sr. exceeded the scope of Terry, suppression would still not be required due to the inevitable discovery doctrine. 4 The United States Supreme Court has explained that “[e]xclusion of physical evidence that would inevitably have been discovered adds nothing to either the integrity or fairness of a criminal trial.” Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 446 , 104 S. Ct. 2501, 2510 , 81 L. 2025Amant, Sr. exceeded the scope of Terry, suppression would still not be required due to the inevitable discovery doctrine. 4 The United States Supreme Court has explained that “[e]xclusion of physical evidence that would inevitably have been discovered adds nothing to either the integrity or fairness of a criminal trial.” Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 446 , 104 S. Ct. 2501, 2510 , 81 L. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
In Re Wimberley
neutral
1 sentence2011Moreover, should petitioner timely file an application to sit for a future bar examination, he remains subject to all conditions set forth in our July 21, 2010 order in In re: Wimberley, 10-1691 (La.7/21/10), 39 So.3d 595 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
In re Mary Belsom Welsh Qualified Trust
green
1 sentence1998Relator [Jones] will be fully protected in the future hearing by the right to assert on appeal any due process violations or other complaints about the hearing procedure used by the Board, or to otherwise seek any appropriate review of rulings and procedures before, during or after the hearing. 96-2005, p. 2, 696 So.2d at 550 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Williams v. Kushner
green
1 sentence1989Id. at 313 (Dixon, J., dissenting). [3] The plaintiff in Williams v. Kushner, 524 So.2d 191 (La.App. 4th Cir.1988), writ granted, 526 So.2d 785 (La.1988) apparently followed Sibley procedures in challenging the constitutionality of La.R.S. 40:1299.39's limitation of the damage award available in actions against qualified health care providers, and that case is now pending in this Court after briefing and oral argument. [1] Because the exception was tried on the pleadings and arguments and the petition adequately alleges the doctor knew the information contained in the pathology report, it is n | 1 | 1989–1989 |
In re the Donald E. Bradford Trust
green
1 sentence1989Id. at 313 (Dixon, J., dissenting). [3] The plaintiff in Williams v. Kushner, 524 So.2d 191 (La.App. 4th Cir.1988), writ granted, 526 So.2d 785 (La.1988) apparently followed Sibley procedures in challenging the constitutionality of La.R.S. 40:1299.39's limitation of the damage award available in actions against qualified health care providers, and that case is now pending in this Court after briefing and oral argument. [1] Because the exception was tried on the pleadings and arguments and the petition adequately alleges the doctor knew the information contained in the pathology report, it is n | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.