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.
18 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dean v. Southmark Const.green2 sentences2010We agree with Shaw’s arguments as ap-pellee, but we reject his arguments as appellant. |„LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard of review applicable in workers’ compensation cases was set out by our supreme court in Dean v. Southmark Const., 03-1051, p. 7 (La.7/6/04), 879 So.2d 112, 117 (citations omitted), wherein the court stated: In worker’s compensation cases, the appropriate standard of review to be applied by the appellate court to the OWC’s findings of fact is the “manifest error-clearly wrong” standard. 2006LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard of review in workers' compensation cases was discussed by our supreme court in Dean v. Southmark Const., 03-1051, p. 7 (La.7/6/04), 879 So.2d 112, 117 ,: In worker's compensation cases, the appropriate standard of review to be applied by the appellate court to the OWC's findings of fact is the "manifest error-clearly wrong" standard. | 1 | 3 |
Bailey v. City of Lafayettegreen2 sentences2010See Bailey v. City of Lafayette, 05-29 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/1/05) , 904 So.2d 922 , writs denied, 05-1689, 05-1690, 05-1691, and 05-1692 (La.1/9/06), 918 So.2d 1054 , 1055. 2010See Bailey v. City of Lafayette, 05-29 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/1/05) , 904 So.2d 922 , writs denied, 05-1689, 05-1690, 05-1691, and 05-1692 (La.1/9/06), 918 So.2d 1054 , 1055. | 1 | 1 |
Bailey v. City of Lafayettegreen2 sentences2010See Bailey v. City of Lafayette, 05-29 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/1/05) , 904 So.2d 922 , writs denied, 05-1689, 05-1690, 05-1691, and 05-1692 (La.1/9/06), 918 So.2d 1054 , 1055. 2010See Bailey v. City of Lafayette, 05-29 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/1/05) , 904 So.2d 922 , writs denied, 05-1689, 05-1690, 05-1691, and 05-1692 (La.1/9/06), 918 So.2d 1054 , 1055. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Grothgreen1 sentence2004LAW AND DISCUSSION The rule, repeatedly upheld by this court, is that once a defendant in a felony case in Louisiana shows that his trial was not commenced within two years after the date of the institution of the prosecution, the State "bears the heavy burden of showing that it is excused from trying the accused on a charge later than the period mandated by [La.C.Cr.P. art.] 578." [2] State v. Groth, 483 So.2d 596, 599 (La. 1986); State v. Amarena, 426 So.2d 613, 617 (La.1983); State v. Devito, 391 So.2d 813, 816 (La.1980) (on reh'g). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Devitogreen1 sentence2004LAW AND DISCUSSION The rule, repeatedly upheld by this court, is that once a defendant in a felony case in Louisiana shows that his trial was not commenced within two years after the date of the institution of the prosecution, the State "bears the heavy burden of showing that it is excused from trying the accused on a charge later than the period mandated by [La.C.Cr.P. art.] 578." [2] State v. Groth, 483 So.2d 596, 599 (La. 1986); State v. Amarena, 426 So.2d 613, 617 (La.1983); State v. Devito, 391 So.2d 813, 816 (La.1980) (on reh'g). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Amarenagreen1 sentence2004LAW AND DISCUSSION The rule, repeatedly upheld by this court, is that once a defendant in a felony case in Louisiana shows that his trial was not commenced within two years after the date of the institution of the prosecution, the State "bears the heavy burden of showing that it is excused from trying the accused on a charge later than the period mandated by [La.C.Cr.P. art.] 578." [2] State v. Groth, 483 So.2d 596, 599 (La. 1986); State v. Amarena, 426 So.2d 613, 617 (La.1983); State v. Devito, 391 So.2d 813, 816 (La.1980) (on reh'g). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pennison v. Carrol
neutral
1 sentence2026LAW AND DISCUSSION Because defendants’ assignments of error all relate to the amount of damages, specifically, the amount of the wrongful death awards to Jake and Katie, the bystander awards to Jake and Katie, and the pain and suffering awards to Jake and Katie, these damages will be largely addressed together, as “a court does not review a particular item in isolation, rather, the entire damage award is reviewed for an abuse of discretion[.]” Pennison v. Carrol, 14-1098, pp. 14-15 (La.App. 1 Cir. 4/24/15) , 167 So.3d 1065, 1078 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Schultz v. Guoth
green
1 sentence2017Schultz v. Guoth, 10-0343 (La. 01/19/11), 57 So.3d 1002, 1005 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Baggett v. Baggett
green
1 sentence2013ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR On appeal, David contends that “[t]he [tjrial [cjourt committed legal error when [it] awarded [Terry] final spousal support in excess of 1/3 of [his] net monthly income.” Additionally, David asserts that “[t]he [t]rial [e]ourt committed manifest error when it awarded [Terry] $1,500.00 a month final spousal support when the record (P-2) clearly shows that the income of [Terry] exceeds her monthly expenditures by $301.05.” LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard of review applicable in reviewing an award of final support is “three-tiered.” Baggett v. Baggett, 96-453, p. 4 (La.App. 3 | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Jackson v. Virginia
red
2 sentences2013Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 , rehearing denied, 444 U.S. 890 , 100 S.Ct. 195 , 62 L.Ed.2d 126 (1979); State ex rel. 2013Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 , rehearing denied, 444 U.S. 890 , 100 S.Ct. 195 , 62 L.Ed.2d 126 (1979); State ex rel. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Southern Railway Co. v. Seaboard Allied Milling Corp.
green
1 sentence2013Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 , rehearing denied, 444 U.S. 890 , 100 S.Ct. 195 , 62 L.Ed.2d 126 (1979); State ex rel. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Parker v. Dubus Engine Co.
green
1 sentence2013Parker v. Dubus Engine Co., 563 So.2d 355 (La.App. 3 Cir.1990). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Thibodeaux v. Kaufman Trailers, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2013LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard of review to be applied in this case was recently set forth in Thibodeaux v. Kaufman Trailers, Inc., 12-885, pp. 2-3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/6/13), 108 So.3d 1283, 1285-86 , wherein we stated: The existence of redhibitory defects is a question of fact, and the trial court’s conclusions about them should not be set aside absent manifest error. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Darensbourg
green
1 sentence2012State v. Darensbourg, 06-572 (La.App. 5 Cir. 12/27/06) , 948 So.2d 1128 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Gahagan v. Thornton
neutral
1 sentence2008Gahagan v. Thornton, 03-851 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/10/03) , 861 So.2d 813 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Alexander v. Pellerin Marble & Granite
green
1 sentence2006Brown v. Coastal Construction & Engineering, Inc., 96-2705 (La.App. 1 Cir. 11/7/97) , 704 So.2d 8, 10 , (citing Alexander v. Pellerin Marble & Granite, 93-1698, pp. 5-6 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 706, 710 ). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Brown v. Coastal Const. & Engineering, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006Brown v. Coastal Construction & Engineering, Inc., 96-2705 (La.App. 1 Cir. 11/7/97) , 704 So.2d 8, 10 , (citing Alexander v. Pellerin Marble & Granite, 93-1698, pp. 5-6 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 706, 710 ). 2006Brown v. Coastal Construction & Engineering, Inc., 96-2705 (La.App. 1 Cir. 11/7/97) , 704 So.2d 8, 10 , (citing Alexander v. Pellerin Marble & Granite, 93-1698, pp. 5-6 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 706, 710 ). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Wheeler
green
1 sentence2005R.S. 15:81-15:89 See State v. Wheeler, 508 So.2d 1384 (La.1987), rehearing denied (La.9/3/87). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Chadbourne
green
1 sentence2004This heavy burden "requires the State to exercise due diligence in discovering the whereabouts of *1056 the defendant as well as taking appropriate steps to secure his presence for trial once it has found him." State v. Chadbourne, 98-1998, p. 1 (La.1/8/99), 728 So.2d 832 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Seal v. Gaylord Container Corp.
green
1 sentence2003Ms. Brister appeals and asserts the following assignment of error: Appellant contends that the administrative law judge applied an incorrect legal standard in ruling that there claimant had not sustained a work-related “accident” pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act. | o,LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard for reviewing workers’ compensation cases was summarized by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Seal v. Gaylord Container Corp., 97-0688, pp. 4-5 (La.12/02/97), 704 So.2d 1161, 1164 , as follows: Factual findings in workers’ compensation cases are subject to the manifest error or clearly wrong s | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Theriot v. Midland Risk Ins. Co.
green
1 sentence2002Co., 95-2895 (La.5/20/97); 694 So.2d 184 , does establish a remedy in favor of third parties in certain situations: "We have no trouble concluding that the legislature intended to provide a right of action directly in favor of third-party claimants in certain situations when it enacted La. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Freeman v. Poulan/Weed Eater
green
1 sentence2001Smith v. Louisiana Dep't of Corrections, 93-1305, p. 4 (La.2/28/94), 633 So.2d 129, 132 ; Freeman v. Poulan/Weed Eater, 93-1530, pp. 4-5 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 733, 737-38 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Smith v. Louisiana Dept. of Corrections
green
1 sentence2001Smith v. Louisiana Dep't of Corrections, 93-1305, p. 4 (La.2/28/94), 633 So.2d 129, 132 ; Freeman v. Poulan/Weed Eater, 93-1530, pp. 4-5 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 733, 737-38 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co.
green
2 sentences1999The exception raising the objection of no cause of action questions "whether the law extends a remedy to anyone under the factual allegations of the petition." Williams v. Mumphrey, 95-643 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1/30/96) , 668 So.2d 1274 , writ not considered, 96-0569 (La.3/29/96), 670 So.2d 1240 ; Louisiana Paddlewheels v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Comm'n, 94-2015 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 885 , 888 n. 3; Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co., 261 La. 1080 , 262 So.2d 328 (La.1972).... 1999The exception raising the objection of no cause of action questions "whether the law extends a remedy to anyone under the factual allegations of the petition." Williams v. Mumphrey, 95-643 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1/30/96) , 668 So.2d 1274 , writ not considered, 96-0569 (La.3/29/96), 670 So.2d 1240 ; Louisiana Paddlewheels v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Comm'n, 94-2015 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 885 , 888 n. 3; Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co., 261 La. 1080 , 262 So.2d 328 (La.1972).... | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Stobart v. State Through DOTD
green
1 sentence1999LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard of review applied by an appellate court is well settled: A court of appeal may not set aside a trial court's or a jury's finding of fact in absence of "manifest error" or unless it is "clearly wrong." Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La.1989); Stobart v. State, Through DOTD, 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
La. Paddlewheels v. La. Riverboat Gaming
green
1 sentence1999The exception raising the objection of no cause of action questions "whether the law extends a remedy to anyone under the factual allegations of the petition." Williams v. Mumphrey, 95-643 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1/30/96) , 668 So.2d 1274 , writ not considered, 96-0569 (La.3/29/96), 670 So.2d 1240 ; Louisiana Paddlewheels v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Comm'n, 94-2015 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 885 , 888 n. 3; Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co., 261 La. 1080 , 262 So.2d 328 (La.1972).... | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Rosell v. Esco
green
1 sentence1999LAW AND DISCUSSION The standard of review applied by an appellate court is well settled: A court of appeal may not set aside a trial court's or a jury's finding of fact in absence of "manifest error" or unless it is "clearly wrong." Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La.1989); Stobart v. State, Through DOTD, 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Williams v. Mumphrey
green
1 sentence1999The exception raising the objection of no cause of action questions "whether the law extends a remedy to anyone under the factual allegations of the petition." Williams v. Mumphrey, 95-643 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1/30/96) , 668 So.2d 1274 , writ not considered, 96-0569 (La.3/29/96), 670 So.2d 1240 ; Louisiana Paddlewheels v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Comm'n, 94-2015 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 885 , 888 n. 3; Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co., 261 La. 1080 , 262 So.2d 328 (La.1972).... | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Williams v. Mumphrey
green
1 sentence1999The exception raising the objection of no cause of action questions "whether the law extends a remedy to anyone under the factual allegations of the petition." Williams v. Mumphrey, 95-643 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1/30/96) , 668 So.2d 1274 , writ not considered, 96-0569 (La.3/29/96), 670 So.2d 1240 ; Louisiana Paddlewheels v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Comm'n, 94-2015 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 885 , 888 n. 3; Babineaux v. Pernie-Bailey Drilling Co., 261 La. 1080 , 262 So.2d 328 (La.1972).... | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.