comparative fault doctrine in Louisiana

1995Bell, supra (applying comparative fault to some strict products liability cases); Landry v. State, 495 So.2d 1284 (La.1986) (applying comparative fault to case arising under La.

1986Harper's holding relied on Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, supra, and a use of comparative fault in a highway defect case, Holmes v. State of Louisiana Through Department of Transportation, 466 So.2d 811 (La.App. 3d Cir.1985), writs den., 472 So.2d 31 (La.1985).

2025R.S. 9:2800.19 due to unreasonable retaliatory force. “[A]bsent a qualifying privilege, any provocative or aggressive conduct on the part of the plaintiff should be incorporated into the allocation of fault by the trier of fact.” Landry, 02-1443, p. 16, 851 So.2d at 955 .

2025These percentages appear to be reasonable under the facts of this case. 11 As in Andrepont, “the force employed by the defendant was not used in defense, was in excess of what was reasonably necessary to repel the advances of the plaintiff[,] and was an implementation of force to which the plaintiff did not consent.” Id. 345 So.2d at 1220 . 12 I joined the majority opinion in Landry, which embraced a comparative fault analysis, but found no fault on the part of defendant based on the particular facts of that case.

2004In Exxon v. Sofec, 517 U.S. 830 , 116 S.Ct. 1813 , 135 L.Ed.2d 113 (1996), Justice Thomas wrote for the Court: The legal question that we took this case to address is whether a plaintiff in admiralty that is the superseding and thus the sole proximate cause of its own injury can recover part of its damages from tortfeasors or contracting partners whose blameworthy actions or breaches were causes in fact of the plaintiff's injury.

2004In Exxon v. Sofec, 517 U.S. 830 , 116 S.Ct. 1813 , 135 L.Ed.2d 113 (1996), Justice Thomas wrote for the Court: The legal question that we took this case to address is whether a plaintiff in admiralty that is the superseding and thus the sole proximate cause of its own injury can recover part of its damages from tortfeasors or contracting partners whose blameworthy actions or breaches were causes in fact of the plaintiff's injury.

1986The later case of Turner v. New Orleans Public Service Inc., 471 So.2d 709 (La. 1985), held that the comparative fault doctrine would thereafter apply to motorist-pedestrian cases.

1985The Supreme Court's recent decision of Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 471 So.2d 709 (La.1985) states that, "Cases like Baumgartner will henceforth be governed by the comparative fault doctrine of C.C. 2323." (footnote omitted) In my view, Turner is a recognition of the fact that Baumgartner was a pragmatic decision to avoid the excesses of contributory negligence and thus obviates the Baumgartner rationale.

1995Rossitto v. Jinks, 576 So.2d 1115 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1991).

1994Rossitto v. Jinks, 576 So.2d 1115 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1991).

1986The Turner Court concluded that the adoption of comparative fault rendered Baumgart-ner unnecessary and that such cases would “henceforth be governed by the comparative fault doctrine of C.C. 2323.” Turner, 476 So.2d at 805 .

1985While this case was pending, the Louisiana Supreme Court decided Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 476 So.2d 800 (La.1985) holding that C.C. art. 2323, the comparative negligence law, now eliminates the necessity for the exception created by Baumgartner for pedestrian cases, and that cases like Baumgartner will henceforth be governed by the comparative fault doctrine.

2025These percentages appear to be reasonable under the facts of this case. 11 As in Andrepont, “the force employed by the defendant was not used in defense, was in excess of what was reasonably necessary to repel the advances of the plaintiff[,] and was an implementation of force to which the plaintiff did not consent.” Id. 345 So.2d at 1220 . 12 I joined the majority opinion in Landry, which embraced a comparative fault analysis, but found no fault on the part of defendant based on the particular facts of that case.

2024Id., 535 So.2d at 416-17 . 9 reasonableness of the plaintiff’s initial actions and defendant’s retaliatory actions are reviewed under a comparative fault analysis.

2024Id., 535 So.2d at 416-17 . 9 reasonableness of the plaintiff’s initial actions and defendant’s retaliatory actions are reviewed under a comparative fault analysis.

2024While a court of appeal is entitled to use reasons for judgment “to gain insight into the district court’s judgment” – to the extent such “reasons may, or may not, have been helpful in that regard” – “the job of the appellate court [is] to review the district court’s judgment, not its reasons for judgment.” Id., 09-0571, p. 78, 61 So.3d at 572 . 6 We find that the district court’s dual findings on “consent” and “justifiable battery” are inherently contradictory and demonstrate a conflation of legal analyses and misapplication of the law, particularly in light of the precedent set by the Landry

2003The appellate court found fault should be equally proportioned between the parties. *612 Landry v. Bellanger, 00-2029 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/28/02) , 813 So.2d 598 .

2002The language in instruction number 9 is taken from Reeves v. Louisiana & Arkansas Railway Company et al., 282 So.2d 503 (La.1973).

2002In Babb v. Boney, 30,443, p. 6 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/08/98), 710 So.2d 1132, 1134 , the second circuit held that some of its prior cases using a comparative fault analysis in battery cases where there was provocation on the part of the victim could be viewed as a comparison of the intentional conduct on the part of both parties.

2000This court has discussed the comparative fault inquiry in Lejeune v. Union Pacific Railroad, 96-294, p. 11-12 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/12/97) ; 693 So.2d 804 , 810: Upon a finding of negligence, La.Civ.

1999In Veazey v. Elmwood Plantation Associates, Ltd., 93-2818, p. 8 (La.11/30/94); 650 So.2d 712, 717 , which we find compelling, logical, valid, and applicable to the facts in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court framed the issue as, "whether the comparative fault law extends to wrongful conduct at the opposite end of the spectrum—intentional torts." The court found that while comparative fault under La.Civ.Code art. 2323 is broad enough to encompass both unintentional and intentional conduct, the Civil Code does not define "fault," and "this Court has heretofore read La.C.C. art 2323 as leavin

1999In Veazey v. Elmwood Plantation Associates, Ltd., 93-2818, p. 8 (La.11/30/94); 650 So.2d 712, 717 , which we find compelling, logical, valid, and applicable to the facts in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court framed the issue as, "whether the comparative fault law extends to wrongful conduct at the opposite end of the spectrum—intentional torts." The court found that while comparative fault under La.Civ.Code art. 2323 is broad enough to encompass both unintentional and intentional conduct, the Civil Code does not define "fault," and "this Court has heretofore read La.C.C. art 2323 as leavin

1991This circuit recently adopted Justice Cole's view in Roberts v. State, Through DOTD, 576 So.2d 85 , 90 (La.App. 2d Cir.1991), writ denied 581 So.2d 685 (La.1991).

1991This circuit recently adopted Justice Cole's view in Roberts v. State, Through DOTD, 576 So.2d 85 , 90 (La.App. 2d Cir.1991), writ denied 581 So.2d 685 (La.1991).

1986Harper's holding relied on Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, supra, and a use of comparative fault in a highway defect case, Holmes v. State of Louisiana Through Department of Transportation, 466 So.2d 811 (La.App. 3d Cir.1985), writs den., 472 So.2d 31 (La.1985).

1986The doctrine of comparative fault was applied in the strict liability case of Harper v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 484 So.2d 737 (La.App. 1st Cir.1986), writ den., 489 So.2d 246 (La. 1986).

1986The doctrine of comparative fault was applied in the strict liability case of Harper v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 484 So.2d 737 (La.App. 1st Cir.1986), writ den., 489 So.2d 246 (La. 1986).

1986Harper's holding relied on Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, supra, and a use of comparative fault in a highway defect case, Holmes v. State of Louisiana Through Department of Transportation, 466 So.2d 811 (La.App. 3d Cir.1985), writs den., 472 So.2d 31 (La.1985).