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.
15 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 1968–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Sneedgreen2 sentences2008Nevertheless, the circumstances indicate that the officer had reasonable suspicion, based on the defendant’s actions, that she may have been intoxicated and potentially posed a danger to herself or others. |7In State v. Sneed, 95-2326, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/11/96), 680 So.2d 1237, 1238 ; this court described the standard to support an investigatory stop: An individual may be stopped and questioned by police if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person “is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense.” La.Code Crim. 2001In State v. Sneed, 95-2326, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/11/96), 680 So.2d 1237, 1238 , this court described the standard to support an investigatory stop: An individual may be stopped and questioned by 13police if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person “is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense.” La.Code Crim. | 3 | 11 |
State ex rel. R.W.green2 sentences2024Additionally, the State conceded to the court that it had not engaged in any communications with the witnesses during the four months preceding the hearing. 7 Id., 16-1187, p. 4 , 213 So.3d at 16 . 2024Additionally, the State conceded to the court that it had not engaged in any communications with the witnesses during the four months preceding the hearing. 7 Id., 16-1187, p. 4 , 213 So.3d at 16 . | 1 | 1 |
cluster 452985green1 sentence2003Corp., 762 F.2d 1250, 1267-68 ([5th Cir.]1985)). | 1 | 1 |
Hanks v. Shell Oil Co.green1 sentence1994In Hanks v. Shell Oil Co., 631 So.2d 1189, 1194 (La.App. 5 Cir.1994), the court described the standard under that amendment as follows: [3] By the amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1061, the Louisiana legislature chose to return to a more liberal standard for principal tort immunity first enunciated in Thibodaux v. Sun Oil Co., 218 La. 453 , 49 So.2d 852 (La.1950). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Sneed
neutral
2 sentences2000In State v. Sneed, 95-2326, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/11/96), 680 So.2d 1237, 1238 , writ denied, 96-2450 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1371 , this court described the standard to support an investigatory stop: An individual may be stopped and questioned by police if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person "is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense." La.Code Crim. 2000In State v. Sneed, 95-2326, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/11/96), 680 So.2d 1237, 1238 , writ denied, 96-2450 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1371 , this Court described the standard to support an investigatory stop: An individual may be stopped and questioned by police if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person “is committing, has committed, or is about to 14commit an offense.” La.Code Crim. | 6 | 1997–2000 |
Triplette v. Exxon Corp.
green
1 sentence2003The court described the test in Burton v. Conoco Offshore, Inc., 93-599, p. 4-5 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2/9/94), 631 So.2d 1374, 1377 , as follows: Our brothers of the First Circuit implemented the United States Fifth Circuit three-prong test in determining whether an activity is ultrahazardous, to-wit: "(1) the activity must relate to land or some other immovable; (2) the activity itself must cause the injury, and the defendant must be engaged directly in the injury-producing activity; and (3) the activity must not require substandard conduct to cause injury." Triplette v. Exxon Corp., supra, [ 554 S | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Burton v. Conoco Offshore, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2003The court described the test in Burton v. Conoco Offshore, Inc., 93-599, p. 4-5 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2/9/94), 631 So.2d 1374, 1377 , as follows: Our brothers of the First Circuit implemented the United States Fifth Circuit three-prong test in determining whether an activity is ultrahazardous, to-wit: "(1) the activity must relate to land or some other immovable; (2) the activity itself must cause the injury, and the defendant must be engaged directly in the injury-producing activity; and (3) the activity must not require substandard conduct to cause injury." Triplette v. Exxon Corp., supra, [ 554 S | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Hill
neutral
1 sentence1997DISCUSSION As this Court recently noted in State v. Hill, 97-1012, p. 2-3 (La.App. 4th Cir. 9/17/97), 700 So.2d 551 , 552: In State v. Sneed, 95-2326, p. 3 (La.App. 4th Cir. 9/11/96), 680 So.2d 1237, 1238 [2] , this Court described the standard to support an investigatory stop: An individual may be stopped and questioned by police if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person "is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense." La.Code Crim. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Thibodaux v. Sun Oil Co.
green
2 sentences1994In Hanks v. Shell Oil Co., 631 So.2d 1189, 1194 (La.App. 5 Cir.1994), the court described the standard under that amendment as follows: [3] By the amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1061, the Louisiana legislature chose to return to a more liberal standard for principal tort immunity first enunciated in Thibodaux v. Sun Oil Co., 218 La. 453 , 49 So.2d 852 (La.1950). 1994In Hanks v. Shell Oil Co., 631 So.2d 1189, 1194 (La.App. 5 Cir.1994), the court described the standard under that amendment as follows: [3] By the amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1061, the Louisiana legislature chose to return to a more liberal standard for principal tort immunity first enunciated in Thibodaux v. Sun Oil Co., 218 La. 453 , 49 So.2d 852 (La.1950). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Thieme v. Louisiana Highway Commission
neutral
1 sentence1968These are Thieme v. Louisiana Highway Commission [La.App.], 5 So.2d 167 , and Carter v. Louisiana Highway Commission [La.App.], 6 So.2d 159 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Carter v. Louisiana Highway Commission
neutral
1 sentence1968These are Thieme v. Louisiana Highway Commission [La.App.], 5 So.2d 167 , and Carter v. Louisiana Highway Commission [La.App.], 6 So.2d 159 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
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.