100 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2026 10 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 |
|---|---|---|
Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.green2 sentences2026See Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. 616 So.2d at 1238 (explaining that, within the context of the peremptory exception, a “cause of action” is “the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiff’s right to judicially assert the action against the defendant.”). 12 Review indicates that Pinnacle correctly identifies May 3, 2022 as the last date on which a party took a “step” in the prosecution or defense of Unity Village’s Petition to Annul Judgment. 2026See Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. 616 So.2d at 1238 (explaining that, within the context of the peremptory exception, a “cause of action” is “the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiff’s right to judicially assert the action against the defendant.”). 12 Review indicates that Pinnacle correctly identifies May 3, 2022 as the last date on which a party took a “step” in the prosecution or defense of Unity Village’s Petition to Annul Judgment. | 48 | 58 |
Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLPgreen2 sentences2026The Louisiana Supreme Court addressed the function and legal analysis of this exception in Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLP, 06-1774, pp. 4–5 (La. 2/22/07), 950 So.2d 641 , 646–47 (citations omitted): As used in the context of the peremptory exception, a “cause of action” refers to the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiff’s right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. 2017The supreme court explained the purpose of an exception of no cause of action in Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLP, 06-1774, pp. 4-5 (La. 2/22/07), 950 So.2d 641, 646-47 (case citations omitted): As used in the context of the peremptory exception, a “cause of action” refers to the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. | 2 | 17 |
Trahan v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Companygreen2 sentences2012Co., 314 So.2d 350, 353 (La.1975); see Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234, 1238 (La.1993) ("cause of action, as used in the context of the peremptory exception, means the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiff's right to judicially assert the action against the defendant.”). . 2005The supreme court explained the cause of action concept in Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234, 1238 , as follows: *654 In Trahan v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 314 So.2d 350, 353 (La.1975), this court defined cause of action as "an act by a defendant which gives a plaintiff a right to invoke judicial interference on his behalf." The court pointed out the difference between a demand, which is "the object of the suit," and a cause of action, which is "the state of facts which gives a party a right to judicially assert an action against the defendant." T | 2 | 2 |
Benoit v. Allstate Ins. Co.green2 sentences2004In Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234 (La.1993), this court stated that the term "cause of action," as used in the context of the peremptory exception of no cause of action, means "the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiff's right to judicially assert the action against the defendant." Benoit, 773 So.2d at 706 (footnote omitted). 2004In Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234 (La.1993), this court stated that the term “cause of action,” as used in the context of the peremptory exception of no cause of action, means “the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert the action against the defendant.” Benoit, 773 So.2d at 706 (footnote omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Ramey v. DeCairegreen2 sentences2019Our supreme court, in Ramey v. DeCaire , 03-1299, pp. 7-8 (La. 3/19/04), 869 So.2d 114 , 118-19 (citations omitted), stated the following: A cause of action, when used in the context of the peremptory exception, is defined as the operative facts that give rise to the plaintiff's right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. 2019Our supreme court, in Ramey v. DeCaire , 03-1299, pp. 7-8 (La. 3/19/04), 869 So.2d 114 , 118-19 (citations omitted), stated the following: A cause of action, when used in the context of the peremptory exception, is defined as the operative facts that give rise to the plaintiff's right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. | 1 | 40 |
Wright v. Louisiana Power & Lightgreen2 sentences2011DISCUSSION Our supreme court discussed the exception of no cause of action in Wright v. Louisiana Power & Light, 06-1181, pp. 14-15 (La.3/9/07), 951 So.2d 1058, 1068-69 (quoting Ramey v. DeCaire, 03-1299, pp. 7-8 (La.3/19/04), 869 So.2d 114, 118-19 ): Is A cause of action, when used in the context of the peremptory exception, is defined as the operative facts that give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. 2009As stated by the Supreme Court in Wright v. Louisiana Power and Light, 2006-1181 (La.3/9/07), 951 So.2d 1058 : A cause of action, when used in the context of the peremptory exception, is defined as the operative facts that give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. | 1 | 2 |
ERA Helicopters, LLC v. Amegingreen1 sentence2016In ERA Helicopters, Inc. v. Amegin, 15-753, pp. 1-2 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/9/15), 181 So.3d 241, 242 (citing Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLP, 06-1774, pp. 4-5 (La.2/22/07), 950 So.2d 641, 646-47 ), this court explained: As used in the context of the peremptory exception, a “cause of action” refers to the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. | 1 | 1 |
Maw Enterprises, L.L.C. v. City of Marksvillegreen2 sentences2014STANDARD OF REVIEW The governing standards of review of a trial court’s ruling on a peremptory exception of no cause of action recently were summarized by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Maw Enterprises, L.L.C. v. City of Marksville, 14-0090, p. 6 (La.9/3/14), 149 So.3d 210, 215 , as follows: • As we have explained, as used in the context of the peremptory exception, a “cause of action” refers to the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert an action against the defendant. • The purpose of the peremptory exception of no cause of action is to test the legal su 2014Maw Enterprises, 14-0090 at p. 6, 149 So.3d at 215 (internal citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Hope v. Madisongreen2 sentences2006A cause of action is an act on the part of a defendant which gives rise to a plaintiff's cause of complaint; "the existence of those facts which give a party a right to judicial interference in his behalf"; the situation or state of facts which entitles a party to sustain an action." Hope v. Madison, 192 La. 593, 606 , 188 So. 711, 715 (1939). 2006A cause of action is an act on the part of a defendant which gives rise to a plaintiff's cause of complaint; "the existence of those facts which give a party a right to judicial interference in his behalf"; the situation or state of facts which entitles a party to sustain an action." Hope v. Madison, 192 La. 593, 606 , 188 So. 711, 715 (1939). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Century Ready Mix Corp. v. Boyte
neutral
2 sentences2017App. 2 Cir. 10/24/07), 968 So.2d 893 , this court stated: A "cause of action," when used in the context of the peremptory exception of no cause of action, is the operative facts that give rise to the plaintiff's right to judicially assert the action against the defendant. 2010Century Ready Mix Corp. v. Boyte, 42,634 (La.App.2d Cir.10/24/07), 968 So.2d 893 . | 2 | 2010–2017 |
Paulsell v. State, Department of Transportation & Development
green
2 sentences2017Paulsell v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 12-0396 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/28/12) , 112 So.3d 856, 864 , writ denied, 13-0274 (La. 3/15/13), 109 So.3d 386 . 2016Paulsell v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 12-0396 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/28/12) , 112 So.3d 856, 864 , writ denied, 13-0274 (La.3/15/13), 109 So.3d 386 . | 2 | 2016–2017 |
Paulsell v. State, Department of Transportation & Development
green
2 sentences2017Paulsell v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 12-0396 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/28/12) , 112 So.3d 856, 864 , writ denied, 13-0274 (La. 3/15/13), 109 So.3d 386 . 2016Paulsell v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 12-0396 (La.App. 1 Cir. 12/28/12) , 112 So.3d 856, 864 , writ denied, 13-0274 (La.3/15/13), 109 So.3d 386 . | 2 | 2016–2017 |
Albarado v. Abadie
neutral
2 sentences2012Id. 2011Id. (citation omitted). | 2 | 2011–2012 |
Arterburn v. Arterburn
green
1 sentence2024Id. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Foret v. Caruso
neutral
2 sentences2016Foret v. Caruso, 15-682 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16) , 194 So.3d 643 . 2016Foret v. Caruso, 15-682 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/16/16) , 194 So.3d 643 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Reynolds v. Bordelon
neutral
1 sentence2015App. 1 Cir. 9/19/14), 154 So.3d 570 . 7 Reynolds v. Bordelon, 12-2362 (La. 2/27/15), 159 So.3d 1061 . 8 Ramey v. DeCaire, 03-1299, p. 7 (La.3/19/04), 869 So.2d 114, 118 ; Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234, 1238 (La.1993). 9 Ramey, at 7, 869 So.2d at 118 ; Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc., 616 So.2d at 1235 . 10 La. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Reynolds v. Bordelon
neutral
1 sentence2015App. 1 Cir. 9/19/14), 154 So.3d 570 . 7 Reynolds v. Bordelon, 12-2362 (La. 2/27/15), 159 So.3d 1061 . 8 Ramey v. DeCaire, 03-1299, p. 7 (La.3/19/04), 869 So.2d 114, 118 ; Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234, 1238 (La.1993). 9 Ramey, at 7, 869 So.2d at 118 ; Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc., 616 So.2d at 1235 . 10 La. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Reynolds v. Bordelon
green
1 sentence2015Reynolds v. Bordelon, 14-2362, p. 5 (La.6/30/15), 172 So.3d 589, 594 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Wood v. Omni Bancshares, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2013Wood v. Omni Bancshares, Inc., 10-216 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/26/11) , 69 So.3d 475, 479-80 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Wood v. OMNI BANCSHARES, INC.
neutral
1 sentence2013Wood v. Omni Bancshares, Inc., 10-216 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/26/11) , 69 So.3d 475, 479-80 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State, Division of Administration, Office of Facility Planning & Control v. Infinity Surety Agency, L.L.C.
green
1 sentence2012State, Division of Administration, Office of Facility Planning and Control v. Infinity Surety Agency, L.L.C., 10-2264, p. 8 (La.5/10/11), 63 So.3d 940, 945 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Fink v. Bryant
green
1 sentence2010"The purpose of the peremptory exception of no cause of action is to test the legal sufficiency of the petition by determining whether the law affords a remedy on the facts alleged in the petition." Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLP, 06-1774, p. 4 (La. 2/22/07), 950 So.2d 641, 646 ; Fink, 801 So.2d at 348 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Bullock v. Graham
green
1 sentence2000In Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234 (La. 1993), this court stated that the term "cause of action," as used in the context of the peremptory exception of no cause of action, means "the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiffs right to judicially assert the action against the defendant." *707 The case of Bullock v. Graham, 96-0711 (La.11/1/96), 681 So.2d 1248 , was decided after the 1989 amendment to Article 1731(1). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.