5 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 2002–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
William REED, Jr., Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION and United Auto Workers, Local Union 276, Defendants-Appelleesgreen2 sentences2010The other two objectors, Allen and Monica Markey, filed an Amicus Objection and Notice of Intent to Appear; however, neither objector nor their counsel appeared at the fairness hearing. [7] Reed v. General Motors Corporation, 703 F.2d 170, 172 (5th Cir. 1983)(quoting Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1214 (5th Cir. 1978)). [8] With respect to the Reed factors, the trial court acknowledged Suzanne Dondeville's testimony regarding the lack of any fraud or collusion during settlement negotiations in its Reasons for Judgment. 2010The other two objectors, Allen and Monica Markey, filed an Amicus Objection and Notice of Intent to Appear; however, neither objector nor their counsel appeared at the fairness hearing. [7] Reed v. General Motors Corporation, 703 F.2d 170, 172 (5th Cir. 1983)(quoting Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1214 (5th Cir. 1978)). [8] With respect to the Reed factors, the trial court acknowledged Suzanne Dondeville's testimony regarding the lack of any fraud or collusion during settlement negotiations in its Reasons for Judgment. | 1 | 1 |
Rush PETTWAY Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AMERICAN CAST IRON PIPE COMPANY, a Corporation, Defendant-Appelleegreen2 sentences2010The other two objectors, Allen and Monica Markey, filed an Amicus Objection and Notice of Intent to Appear; however, neither objector nor their counsel appeared at the fairness hearing. [7] Reed v. General Motors Corporation, 703 F.2d 170, 172 (5th Cir. 1983)(quoting Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1214 (5th Cir. 1978)). [8] With respect to the Reed factors, the trial court acknowledged Suzanne Dondeville's testimony regarding the lack of any fraud or collusion during settlement negotiations in its Reasons for Judgment. 2010The other two objectors, Allen and Monica Markey, filed an Amicus Objection and Notice of Intent to Appear; however, neither objector nor their counsel appeared at the fairness hearing. [7] Reed v. General Motors Corporation, 703 F.2d 170, 172 (5th Cir. 1983)(quoting Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1214 (5th Cir. 1978)). [8] With respect to the Reed factors, the trial court acknowledged Suzanne Dondeville's testimony regarding the lack of any fraud or collusion during settlement negotiations in its Reasons for Judgment. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
First Guar. Bk. v. Baton Rouge Petroleum Center, Inc.
green
1 sentence2023First Guaranty Bank, Hammond Louisiana v. Baton Rouge Petroleum Center, Inc., 529 So.2d 834 (La. 1987). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Reed v. Mid-States Wood Preservers, Inc.
green
1 sentence2013Id., 43,799 at 5, 999 So.2d at 192 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Waller v. Stuckey
green
1 sentence2008However, citing this court's opinion in Waller v. Stuckey, 613 So.2d 643 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1993), writ denied, 618 So.2d 409 (La. 1993), Mid States argues that the MSAs, which stemmed from a settlement agreement, are not acknowledgments which served to interrupt prescription of Reed's claim. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lima v. Schmidt
green
1 sentence2008A careful reading of Waller and the line of cases from which it evolves, particularly Lima, supra, reveals an explanation as to what may or may not be considered a tacit acknowledgment capable of interrupting prescription of a claim. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Shaw v. Bourn
green
1 sentence2008However, citing this court's opinion in Waller v. Stuckey, 613 So.2d 643 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1993), writ denied, 618 So.2d 409 (La. 1993), Mid States argues that the MSAs, which stemmed from a settlement agreement, are not acknowledgments which served to interrupt prescription of Reed's claim. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Sibley v. Bd. of Sup'rs of Louisiana State University
green
1 sentence2002NOTES [1] Sibley v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University, 477 So.2d 1094 (La. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.