5 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 2011–2019 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bogues v. Louisiana Energy Consultants, Inc.
green
2 sentences2019A plaintiff bringing a claim for tortious interference with business must ultimately show "by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant improperly influenced others not to deal with the plaintiff." Significantly, it is not enough to allege that a defendant's actions affected plaintiff's business interests; the plaintiff must allege that the defendant actually prevented the plaintiff from dealing with a third party. [Internal Citations Omitted.] Id. at 1134-35 . 2019A plaintiff bringing a claim for tortious interference with business must ultimately show "by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant improperly influenced others not to deal with the plaintiff." Significantly, it is not enough to allege that a defendant's actions affected plaintiff's business interests; the plaintiff must allege that the defendant actually prevented the plaintiff from dealing with a third party. [Internal Citations Omitted.] Id. at 1134-35 . | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Junior Money Bags, Ltd. v. Segal
green
2 sentences2017A plaintiff bringing a claim for tortious interference with business must ultimately show “by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant improperly influenced others not to deal with the plaintiff.” Junior Money Bags, Ltd., supra. Significantly, it is not enough to allege that a defendant’s actions affected plaintiffs business interests; the plaintiff must allege that the defendant actually prevented the plaintiff from dealing with a third party. 2013A plaintiff bringing a claim for tortious interference with business must ultimately show “by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant improperly influenced others not to deal with the plaintiff.” Junior Money Bags, Ltd., supra. Significantly, it is not enough to allege that a defendant’s actions affected plaintiffs business interests; the plaintiff must allege that the defendant actually prevented the plaintiff from dealing with a third party. | 2 | 2013–2017 |
Ustica Enterprises, Inc. v. Costello
green
2 sentences2013Ustica, supra. Id. at 1134-35. 2011Ustica, supra. The jurisprudence has viewed this cause of action with disfavor. | 2 | 2011–2013 |
John W. Dussouy, Jr. v. Gulf Coast Investment Corporation
green
1 sentence2011Dussouy, supra. A plaintiff bringing a claim for tortious interference with business must ultimately *1135 show “by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant improperly influenced others not to deal with the plaintiff.” Junior Money Bags, Ltd,., supra. Significantly, it is not enough to allege that a defendant’s actions affected plaintiffs business interests; the plaintiff must allege that the defendant actually prevented the plaintiff from dealing with a third party. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
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.