25 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1967–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Overtongreen2 sentences1998See State v. Overton, 596 So.2d 1344, 1353 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 599 So.2d 315 (La.1992). 1997State v. Overton, 596 So.2d 1344, 1353 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 599 So.2d 315 (La.1992). | 2 | 3 |
Schneckloth v. Bustamontegreen2 sentences1994See Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); State v. Overton, 596 So.2d 1344 (La. 1994See Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); State v. Overton, 596 So.2d 1344 (La. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Jacksongreen2 sentences1998See State v. Overton, 596 So.2d 1344, 1353 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 599 So.2d 315 (La.1992). 1997State v. Overton, 596 So.2d 1344, 1353 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 599 So.2d 315 (La.1992). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Greengreen1 sentence2013See State v. Green, 94-0887, p. 15 (La.05/22/95), 655 So.2d 272, 283 (finding that the trial court was justified in relying upon the defendant’s familiarity with the criminal justice system because it tended to show that the custodial interrogation was not an experience foreign to Green, and that prior Boykinizations indicated a repeated exposure to Miranda rights and were relevant); Rosales, supra (finding the defendant’s waiver of counsel valid where defendant pleaded to an uncomplicated DWI misdemeanor offense despite a lack of inquiry into the defendant’s education, mental condition or und | 1 | 1 |
State v. Straingreen1 sentence2013See State v. Green, 94-0887, p. 15 (La.05/22/95), 655 So.2d 272, 283 (finding that the trial court was justified in relying upon the defendant’s familiarity with the criminal justice system because it tended to show that the custodial interrogation was not an experience foreign to Green, and that prior Boykinizations indicated a repeated exposure to Miranda rights and were relevant); Rosales, supra (finding the defendant’s waiver of counsel valid where defendant pleaded to an uncomplicated DWI misdemeanor offense despite a lack of inquiry into the defendant’s education, mental condition or und | 1 | 1 |
State v. Stricklandgreen1 sentence1998State v. Strickland, 94-0025, pp. 48-49 (La.11/1/96); 683 So.2d 218, 238 ("[T]his Court has determined that the lack of a standard actually gives defendants an advantage by allowing jurors to consider any amount of mitigating evidence in their determination."). | 1 | 1 |
Black v. Gorman-Ruppgreen2 sentences1998Lack of A Warning Sticker On Or Near the Air Filter We previously have held that the "the issue of where the warning must be placed must be considered simply as one aspect of whether or not the warning is adequate." Black v. Gorman-Rupp, 94-1494 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/16/95) , 655 So.2d 717, 723 (citing Bloxom ). 1998Lack of A Warning Sticker On Or Near the Air Filter We previously have held that the "the issue of where the warning must be placed must be considered simply as one aspect of whether or not the warning is adequate." Black v. Gorman-Rupp, 94-1494 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/16/95) , 655 So.2d 717, 723 (citing Bloxom ). | 1 | 1 |
Cazenave v. Piercegreen1 sentence1997See Cazenave v. Pierce, 568 So.2d 1360 (La.App. 4 Cir.1990), writ denied, 572 So.2d 68 (La.1991.) Delaney protests that he did, in fact, object to the lack of such an instruction. | 1 | 1 |
Davenport v. Amax Nickel, Inc.green1 sentence1997See Cazenave v. Pierce, 568 So.2d 1360 (La.App. 4 Cir.1990), writ denied, 572 So.2d 68 (La.1991.) Delaney protests that he did, in fact, object to the lack of such an instruction. | 1 | 1 |
Roberts v. Benoitgreen1 sentence1993See generally Roberts v. Benoit, 605 So.2d 1032, 1050 (La.1992) (on reh'g); Harris v. Pizza Hut, Inc., 455 So.2d 1364 (La. 1984). | 1 | 1 |
| State Ex Rel. Clark v. Marullogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bertrand v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Companygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bloxom v. Bloxom
green
2 sentences1998"An essential element of the plaintiff's cause of action for failure to adequately warn of a product's danger is that there be some reasonable connection between the omission of the manufacturer and the damage which the plaintiff has suffered." Bloxom, 512 So.2d at 850 . 1992With respect to liability because of a lack of a warning, I am not persuaded by the opinion's reliance on Bloxom v. Bloxom, 512 So.2d 839 (La.1987), which pronounces the presumption that those warned will follow that warning. | 2 | 1992–1998 |
In Re Adoption of BGS
green
1 sentence2020The Louisiana Supreme Court in B.G.S. stated, “the lack of a hearing, combined with the placement of decision in the hands of a potentially adverse decision maker, violates the most basic principles of due process under both our state and federal constitutions.” Id. at 556 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Kent v. United States
green
2 sentences2019The lack of a hearing vitiates the due process standards mandated by the Supreme Court in Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 , 86 S.Ct. 1045 , 16 L.Ed. 2d 84 (1966). 2019The lack of a hearing vitiates the due process standards mandated by the Supreme Court in Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 , 86 S.Ct. 1045 , 16 L.Ed. 2d 84 (1966). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Solow v. Heard, McElroy & Vestal, LLP
green
1 sentence2007This argument is based mainly on language in Solow v. Heard, 05-1028, p. 4-5, (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/12/06), 937 So.2d 875, 878 , writs denied, 06-1680 (La.10/6/06), 938 So.2d 80 , stating that "[t]he jurisprudence has recognized that the parties may waive the panel by failing to assert a dilatory exception of prematurity timely as required by La. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Solow v. HEARD, MCELROY & VESTAL, LLP
green
1 sentence2007This argument is based mainly on language in Solow v. Heard, 05-1028, p. 4-5, (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/12/06), 937 So.2d 875, 878 , writs denied, 06-1680 (La.10/6/06), 938 So.2d 80 , stating that "[t]he jurisprudence has recognized that the parties may waive the panel by failing to assert a dilatory exception of prematurity timely as required by La. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Hampton
green
1 sentence2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Powell
green
1 sentence2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Powell
green
1 sentence2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Morehead
green
1 sentence2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Reeder
green
2 sentences2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni 2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Hilton
green
1 sentence2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Clark
neutral
1 sentence2006Thus, the lack of hearing caused no prejudice to the State. [2] For discussions about the difference between evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 609.1 and evidence submitted under La.Code Evid. art. 404(B), see State v. Morehead, 38,124 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/2/04), 870 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 04-1283 (La.10/15/04), 883 So.2d 1043 ; State v. Reeder, 95-2407 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/16/97) , 698 So.2d 56 ; State v. Clark, 95-1354 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/11/96) , 687 So.2d 470 , writ denied, 97-715 (La.6/13/97), 695 So.2d 986 ; State v. Powell, 28,788 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/96), 683 So.2d 1281 , writ deni | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Donnell C. v. Illinois State Board of Education
green
1 sentence2002Finally, juveniles in correctional facilities have a federal constitutional right to an adequate educational program. 14 Donnell C. v. Illinois State Bd. of Education, 829 F.Supp. 1016 (N.D.Ill.1993) (finding a lack of instruction gave rise to claim under substantive due process); Robin A. v. McCoy, Civ. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Carroll v. Evangeline Parish Police Jury
neutral
2 sentences1997Carroll v. Evangeline Parish Police Jury, 94-1138 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/1/95) ; 651 So.2d 424 , writ denied, 95-806 (La.5/5/95); 654 So.2d 329 . 1997Carroll v. Evangeline Parish Police Jury, 94-1138 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/1/95) ; 651 So.2d 424 , writ denied, 95-806 (La.5/5/95); 654 So.2d 329 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Doty v. Danzas Transportation Corp.
neutral
1 sentence1997Carroll v. Evangeline Parish Police Jury, 94-1138 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/1/95) ; 651 So.2d 424 , writ denied, 95-806 (La.5/5/95); 654 So.2d 329 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Sprinkle
green
1 sentence1995In State v. Sprinkle, 439 So.2d 1230 (La.App. 5 Cir.1983), this Court said at page 1232: "Reference made in closing argument that the state's case stands uncontroverted has been frequently upheld ... | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Kavanaugh v. Travelers Insurance Company
green
1 sentence1993Southern Cotton Oil Co. relies on Kavanaugh v. Travelers Insurance Company, 203 So.2d 780 (La.App.2d Cir.1967), for the proposition that they are not negligent in failing to post warning signs as to the existence of the spur track. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Harris v. Pizza Hut of Louisiana, Inc.
green
1 sentence1993See generally Roberts v. Benoit, 605 So.2d 1032, 1050 (La.1992) (on reh'g); Harris v. Pizza Hut, Inc., 455 So.2d 1364 (La. 1984). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Price v. STATE, DEPT. OF PUB. SAF., LICENSE CONTROL & DRIVER IMPROVEMENT DIV.
green
1 sentence1992Price v. State of Louisiana, Department of Public Safety, License Control and Driver Improvement Division, 325 So.2d 759 (La.App.1st Cir. 1976). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| State v. Simmons green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| State v. Klein green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Elizey
neutral
1 sentence1987LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841; State v. Klein, supra; State v. Elizey, supra; State v. Simmons, supra. Notwithstanding the lack of defense objection, LSA-R.S. 15:447 provides that any part of the res gestae is always admissible in evidence. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| State v. Henderson green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Petree v. Crowe green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| State v. Robinson neutral | 1 | 1975–1975 |
| A Quantity of Copies of Books v. Kansas green | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.