Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
23 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Roberts v. Benoitgreen2 sentences2015“Rather, the cause in fact inquiry is a neutral one, free of the entanglements of policy considerations-morality, culpability or responsibility-involved in the duty-risk analysis.” Roberts, 605 So.2d at 1042 . 2004Perkins, supra; Roberts, supra. The cause in fact inquiry is limited in scope, so that to the extent the defendant’s actions had something to do with plaintiffs injury, the test of a factual, causal | ¿relationship is met. | 3 | 9 |
Williamson v. Monroe Medical Clinicgreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Williamson v. Monroe Medical Clinic, 37,463 (La.App 2d Cir.8/20/03), 852 So.2d 1192 . 2010See, e.g., Williamson v. Monroe Medical Clinic, 37,463 (La.App 2d Cir.8/20/03), 852 So.2d 1192 . | 2 | 2 |
Boteler v. Riveragreen1 sentence2004Appellant’s Assignment of Error No. 1 First, the DOTD argues that there is no basis for DOTD liability because under the cause-in-fact analysis applicable in this case, which is basically a “but-for” inquiry, Boteler v. Rivera, 96-1507, p. 5 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/17/97), 700 So.2d 913, 916 (citation omitted), there is no basis for finding the roadway was the proximate cause of the accident because based on the expert testimony they presented at trial, even if the roadway shoulder had been wider and the slope less steep, the truck driven by Rizzuto would still have struck the bayou. |sThe jury was | 1 | 1 |
Shelton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Companygreen1 sentence1992Shelton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 334 So.2d 406, 409 (La.1976). | 1 | 1 |
Harris v. Pizza Hut of Louisiana, Inc.green1 sentence1989See Harris v. Pizza Hut, 455 So.2d at 1371 (where the intentional act of the shooting was held not to break the cause-in-fact chain between the negligence of the security guard and the injury of the bystanders). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Perkins v. Entergy Corp.
green
2 sentences2006In addition, Entergy contends that the fault of Murphy and the defective check valve were superseding and intervening causes, thereby absolving *255 Entergy of liability. [9] In Perkins v. Entergy Corp., 00-1372, 00-1387, 00-1440, pp. 7-10 (La.3/23/01), 782 So.2d 606, 611-13 , the Supreme Court stated: Under Louisiana jurisprudence, most negligence cases are resolved by employing a duty/risk analysis. 2004Perkins, supra; Roberts, supra. The cause in fact inquiry is limited in scope, so that to the extent the defendant’s actions had something to do with plaintiffs injury, the test of a factual, causal | ¿relationship is met. | 3 | 2002–2006 |
Slade v. State ex rel. University of Louisiana at Monroe
neutral
1 sentence2025Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Graves v. Page
green
1 sentence2013“When there are multiple causes, clearly cause-in-fact exists when the plaintiffs harm would not have occurred absent the specific defendant’s conduct.” Id. at 403 (citing Graves v. Page, 96-2201, p. 9 (La.11/7/97), 703 So.2d 566, 570 ). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Sprinkle
green
2 sentences2013Particularly revealing is that Ms. Clement’s MRI showed a fresh herniation of the disc at the L4-5 two months after the June 2009 accident. |9In Arcadian Corporation v. Olin Corporation, 01-1060, p. 11 (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/8/02), 824 So.2d 396, 405 , writ denied, 02-1930 (La.10/25/02), 827 So.2d 1174 , we also examined the cause-in-fact inquiry in the duty-risk analysis. 2013“When there are multiple causes, clearly cause-in-fact exists when the plaintiffs harm would not have occurred absent the specific defendant’s conduct.” Id. at 403 (citing Graves v. Page, 96-2201, p. 9 (La.11/7/97), 703 So.2d 566, 570 ). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Arcadian Corp. v. Olin Corp.
green
1 sentence2013Particularly revealing is that Ms. Clement’s MRI showed a fresh herniation of the disc at the L4-5 two months after the June 2009 accident. |9In Arcadian Corporation v. Olin Corporation, 01-1060, p. 11 (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/8/02), 824 So.2d 396, 405 , writ denied, 02-1930 (La.10/25/02), 827 So.2d 1174 , we also examined the cause-in-fact inquiry in the duty-risk analysis. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Bonin v. Ferrellgas, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2004Then, recognizing that even if Empiregas was negligent, it would be excused from liability "if an intervening cause superseded the original negligence and, alone, produced the injury," the court of appeal found that "the entire cause-in-fact inquiry turns on Mr. Lanclos' knowledge of whether he needed to cap the valves." Id. at 797 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Quick v. Murphy Oil Co.
green
1 sentence1997"Courts which have evaluated cause in fact ... have applied the `but for' and substantial factor tests alternately and in combination to determine cause in fact." Quick v. Murphy Oil Co., 93-2267, p. 8 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/20/94); 643 So.2d 1291, 1295 , writ denied, 94-2583 (La.1/6/95); 648 So.2d 923 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Quick v. Murphy Oil Co.
green
1 sentence1997"Courts which have evaluated cause in fact ... have applied the `but for' and substantial factor tests alternately and in combination to determine cause in fact." Quick v. Murphy Oil Co., 93-2267, p. 8 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/20/94); 643 So.2d 1291, 1295 , writ denied, 94-2583 (La.1/6/95); 648 So.2d 923 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Burdis v. Lafourche Parish Police Jury
green
1 sentence1994Socorro v. City of New Orleans, 579 So.2d 931 (La.1991); Burdis v. Lafourche Parish Police Jury, 618 So.2d 971 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 620 So.2d 843 (La.1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Burdis v. Lafourche Parish Police Jury
green
1 sentence1994Socorro v. City of New Orleans, 579 So.2d 931 (La.1991); Burdis v. Lafourche Parish Police Jury, 618 So.2d 971 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 620 So.2d 843 (La.1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Socorro v. City of New Orleans
green
1 sentence1994Socorro v. City of New Orleans, 579 So.2d 931 (La.1991); Burdis v. Lafourche Parish Police Jury, 618 So.2d 971 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 620 So.2d 843 (La.1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc.
green
2 sentences1992We recognized the very limited scope of the cause in fact inquiry in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., 260 La. 542 , 256 So.2d 620 (1972). 1992We recognized the very limited scope of the cause in fact inquiry in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., 260 La. 542 , 256 So.2d 620 (1972). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Sinitiere v. Lavergne
green
1 sentence1987Sinitiere, supra. The cause-in-fact test requires that but for the conduct, the injuries would not have been sustained. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp.
green
1 sentence1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc.
green
1 sentence1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Dixie Drive It Yourself System New Orleans Co. v. American Beverage Co.
green
2 sentences1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). 1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Ishee v. State, Through Dept. of Transp.
green
1 sentence1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Tyson v. American Indemnity Co.
neutral
1 sentence1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Succession of True
green
1 sentence1983Dixie Drive-it Yourself System v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (La.1962), Straley v. Calongne Drayage and Storage, Inc., 346 So.2d 171 (La.1977), Kalmn, Inc. v. Empiregas Corp., 406 So.2d 276 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1981), Ishee v. State, Department of Transportation & Development, 413 So.2d 1362 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Tyson v. American Indemnity Co., 411 So.2d 498 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), writ denied, 413 So.2d 505 (La. 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.