14 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1954–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gamble v. Whitegreen1 sentence2020See Gamble v. White, 566 So.2d 171, 172 (La. | 1 | 1 |
Theriot v. Midland Risk Ins. Co.green1 sentence2014Co., 95-2895, p. 3 (La.5/20/97), 694 So.2d 184, 186 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Oscanyan v. Arms Co.green2 sentences2012Further, a clear and unambiguous admission of fact made by a party’s attorney in an opening statement in a civil or criminal case is binding upon the party.”); United States v. McKeon, 738 F.2d 26, 30 (2nd Cir.1984) (“An admission by a defense attorney in his opening statement in a criminal trial has ... been held to eliminate the need for further proof on a given element of an offense.”) (citation omitted); Hall v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 447 F.Supp.2d 604, 608 (W.D.Va.2006) (“Though ease law on the issue is scarce, the principle that an admission of counsel during trial ‘may dispense with 2012Further, a clear and unambiguous admission of fact made by a party’s attorney in an opening statement in a civil or criminal case is binding upon the party.”); United States v. McKeon, 738 F.2d 26, 30 (2nd Cir.1984) (“An admission by a defense attorney in his opening statement in a criminal trial has ... been held to eliminate the need for further proof on a given element of an offense.”) (citation omitted); Hall v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 447 F.Supp.2d 604, 608 (W.D.Va.2006) (“Though ease law on the issue is scarce, the principle that an admission of counsel during trial ‘may dispense with | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Bernard McKeongreen1 sentence2012Further, a clear and unambiguous admission of fact made by a party’s attorney in an opening statement in a civil or criminal case is binding upon the party.”); United States v. McKeon, 738 F.2d 26, 30 (2nd Cir.1984) (“An admission by a defense attorney in his opening statement in a criminal trial has ... been held to eliminate the need for further proof on a given element of an offense.”) (citation omitted); Hall v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 447 F.Supp.2d 604, 608 (W.D.Va.2006) (“Though ease law on the issue is scarce, the principle that an admission of counsel during trial ‘may dispense with | 1 | 1 |
Hall v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LPgreen1 sentence2012Further, a clear and unambiguous admission of fact made by a party’s attorney in an opening statement in a civil or criminal case is binding upon the party.”); United States v. McKeon, 738 F.2d 26, 30 (2nd Cir.1984) (“An admission by a defense attorney in his opening statement in a criminal trial has ... been held to eliminate the need for further proof on a given element of an offense.”) (citation omitted); Hall v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 447 F.Supp.2d 604, 608 (W.D.Va.2006) (“Though ease law on the issue is scarce, the principle that an admission of counsel during trial ‘may dispense with | 1 | 1 |
State v. Lewisgreen1 sentence1983State v. Lewis, 416 So.2d 921, 924 (La.1982); State v. Lockett, 319 So.2d 420 (La.1973); La.R.S. 15:434. | 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. Casey
green
2 sentences2018"Erroneous admission of evidence requires reversal only where there is a reasonable possibility that the evidence might have contributed to the verdict." State v. Casey , supra at 13, 775 So.2d at 1033 . 2018"Erroneous admission of evidence requires reversal only where there is a reasonable possibility that the evidence might have contributed to the verdict." State v. Casey , supra at 13, 775 So.2d at 1033 . | 3 | 2008–2018 |
Ex Parte Wall
green
2 sentences2003Ex parte Wall, 107 U.S. 265, 274 , 2 S.Ct. 569, 576 , 27 L.Ed. 552 (1882); Louisiana State Bar Association v. Ponder, 340 So.2d 134 (La.1976), on rehearing 340 So.2d 141 ; Code of Professional Responsibility supra, Ethical Consideration 1-1. 2003Ex parte Wall, 107 U.S. 265, 274 , 2 S.Ct. 569, 576 , 27 L.Ed. 552 (1882); Louisiana State Bar Association v. Ponder, 340 So.2d 134 (La.1976), on rehearing 340 So.2d 141 ; Code of Professional Responsibility supra, Ethical Consideration 1-1. | 2 | 1979–2003 |
Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Ponder
green
2 sentences2003Ex parte Wall, 107 U.S. 265, 274 , 2 S.Ct. 569, 576 , 27 L.Ed. 552 (1882); Louisiana State Bar Association v. Ponder, 340 So.2d 134 (La.1976), on rehearing 340 So.2d 141 ; Code of Professional Responsibility supra, Ethical Consideration 1-1. 1979Ex parte Wall, 107 U.S. 265, 274 , 2 S.Ct. 569, 576 , 27 L.Ed. 552 (1882); Louisiana State Bar Association v. Ponder, 340 So.2d 134 (La.1976), on rehearing 340 So.2d 141 ; Code of Professional Responsibility supra, Ethical Consideration 1-1. | 2 | 1979–2003 |
State v. Marshall
green
1 sentence2014Following the jury’s return of a lesser verdict of manslaughter on the original charge of second degree murder, the court sentenced defendant to 40 years imprisonment at hard labor. |fiOn appeal, the court of appeal indicated the state conceded that the prosecutor violated Doyle, supra, by cross-examining defendant with respect to his post-arrest, post-Miranda silence, and then arguing to jurors that defendant’s silence amounted to an admission his claim of self-defense at trial was spurious; therefore, only the question of whether the error required reversal of defendant’s conviction and sent | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Davis
green
1 sentence1990State v. Davis, supra. Underlying this prohibition is the lack of probative value and insufficient scientific reliability, as well as the possible prejudicial effect on the lay trier of fact. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
McLaughlin v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company
green
1 sentence1989Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal is set aside, and the case is remanded to the court of appeal to rule upon the admissibility of the test results and to reconsider the fault of the parties in the light of that ruling. [McLaughlin v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company, 533 So.2d 340 (La.1988).] FACTS Kirk McLaughlin (McLaughlin) was killed on April 10, 1983, when the 1978 Chevrolet Monza automobile he was driving collided with an 18-wheel tractor-trailer rig (the truck) operated by Howard Glasper and owned by Hammond Sandblasting, Inc. McLaughlin’s parents, Clarence “Red” McLaughl | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Graham
green
1 sentence1987In so holding, the court referred to the earlier cases of State v. Morrison, 392 So.2d 1037 (La.1980), State v. Graham, 360 So.2d 853 (La.1978), and State v. Jones, 316 So.2d 100 (La.1975). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Jones
green
1 sentence1987In so holding, the court referred to the earlier cases of State v. Morrison, 392 So.2d 1037 (La.1980), State v. Graham, 360 So.2d 853 (La.1978), and State v. Jones, 316 So.2d 100 (La.1975). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Morrison
green
1 sentence1987In so holding, the court referred to the earlier cases of State v. Morrison, 392 So.2d 1037 (La.1980), State v. Graham, 360 So.2d 853 (La.1978), and State v. Jones, 316 So.2d 100 (La.1975). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Lockett
neutral
1 sentence1983State v. Lewis, 416 So.2d 921, 924 (La.1982); State v. Lockett, 319 So.2d 420 (La.1973); La.R.S. 15:434. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Shuff v. Life Casualty Ins. Co.
neutral
1 sentence1954The function of the court, however, is to interpret the contract, where interpretation is required, and otherwise to enforce it as written, and the stipulation that no allowance of time shall be made ‘unless a claim therefor is presented, in writing, to the architect, within forty-eight hours of the occurrence of the delay,’ requires no interpretation, but is to be enforced as written, from which it follows that, in view of the admission that no claim in writing was made as thus provided, the testimony offered to prove merely that delays occurred, upon which such claims might have been predica | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Carrano v. Colombel
neutral
1 sentence1954The function of the court, however, is to interpret the contract, where interpretation is required, and otherwise to enforce it as written, and the stipulation that no allowance of time shall be made ‘unless a claim therefor is presented, in writing, to the architect, within forty-eight hours of the occurrence of the delay,’ requires no interpretation, but is to be enforced as written, from which it follows that, in view of the admission that no claim in writing was made as thus provided, the testimony offered to prove merely that delays occurred, upon which such claims might have been predica | 1 | 1954–1954 |
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.