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.
14 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Superior Oil Co. v. Reilygreen1 sentence2010Superior Oil Co. v. Reily, 284 La. 621 , 629, 100 So.2d 888, 891 (La.1958); Gibson v. State, 03-1112, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2/10/04), 866 So.2d 375, 378 . | 1 | 1 |
Lima v. Schmidtred1 sentence2003Thus, the trial court properly denied the PCF’s exception of prescription, albeit for different reasons. | ^Specifically, “[prescription may be renounced only after it has accrued.” La.Civ.Code art. 3449. “[R]enunciation requires a new promise to pay the debt.... ” Lima v. Schmidt, 595 So.2d 624, 631 (La.1992). | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Southern Baptist Hosp.green1 sentence2003See for example McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc., 01-1270, 01-1271, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/26/02), 810 So.2d 1283, 1288 (holding that the PCF does not have the right to raise exceptions after the limitation of liability has been satisfied because to allow it to do so “would be to permit it to raise defenses only given to a Defendant, which it is not”), writ denied, 02-1344 (La.11/27/02), 831 So.2d 284 ; Miller v. S. Baptist Hosp., 00-1352, p. 12 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/01), 806 So.2d 10, 19 (holding that the PCF “does not have the standing to raise the issue of prescription/peremption”), writ de | 1 | 1 |
McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc.green1 sentence2003See for example McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc., 01-1270, 01-1271, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/26/02), 810 So.2d 1283, 1288 (holding that the PCF does not have the right to raise exceptions after the limitation of liability has been satisfied because to allow it to do so “would be to permit it to raise defenses only given to a Defendant, which it is not”), writ denied, 02-1344 (La.11/27/02), 831 So.2d 284 ; Miller v. S. Baptist Hosp., 00-1352, p. 12 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/01), 806 So.2d 10, 19 (holding that the PCF “does not have the standing to raise the issue of prescription/peremption”), writ de | 1 | 1 |
McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc.green1 sentence2003See for example McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc., 01-1270, 01-1271, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/26/02), 810 So.2d 1283, 1288 (holding that the PCF does not have the right to raise exceptions after the limitation of liability has been satisfied because to allow it to do so “would be to permit it to raise defenses only given to a Defendant, which it is not”), writ denied, 02-1344 (La.11/27/02), 831 So.2d 284 ; Miller v. S. Baptist Hosp., 00-1352, p. 12 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/01), 806 So.2d 10, 19 (holding that the PCF “does not have the standing to raise the issue of prescription/peremption”), writ de | 1 | 1 |
Tucker v. Laingreen1 sentence2003See for example McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc., 01-1270, 01-1271, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/26/02), 810 So.2d 1283, 1288 (holding that the PCF does not have the right to raise exceptions after the limitation of liability has been satisfied because to allow it to do so “would be to permit it to raise defenses only given to a Defendant, which it is not”), writ denied, 02-1344 (La.11/27/02), 831 So.2d 284 ; Miller v. S. Baptist Hosp., 00-1352, p. 12 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/01), 806 So.2d 10, 19 (holding that the PCF “does not have the standing to raise the issue of prescription/peremption”), writ de | 1 | 1 |
Kelty v. Brumfieldgreen1 sentence1994Kelty v. Brumfield, 559 So.2d 907, 909 (La.App. 4th Cir.1990). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Khammash v. Clark
green
1 sentence2020In Khammash v. Clark, 2013- 1564 ( La. 5/ 7/ 14), 145 So. 3d 246 , the Supreme Court later extended its approach adopted in Graham to apply to summary judgments as well as $ 100, 000. 00 settlements, and further, allowed the PCF to challenge the liability of all damages, even when liability up to 100, 000. 00 has been statutorily admitted by the health care provider via the settlement. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Hanks v. Seale
green
1 sentence2015Plaintiffs argue that according to the ruling of the Louisiana Supreme Court in Hanks v. Seale, 04-1485 (La.6/17/05), 904 So.2d 662 , the determination of liability in a trial between the malpractice victim and the healthcare provider- precludes the PCF’s challenge in these assignments of error. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Hebert v. Old Republic Ins. Co.
green
1 sentence2014Co., 01-355 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1/29/02) , 807 So.2d 1114, 1127 . | uThe PCF’s claim that the jury was confused regarding the issue of indemnity has no merit. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
LeBreton v. Rabito
green
1 sentence2013In granting the PCF’s exception of prescription, the trial court found the Louisiana Supreme Court case of LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), 714 So.2d 1226 , controlling. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Warren v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Co.
green
2 sentences2013Warren, 21 So.3d at 203 . 2013Warren, 21 So.3d at 203 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Gibson v. State
neutral
1 sentence2010Superior Oil Co. v. Reily, 284 La. 621 , 629, 100 So.2d 888, 891 (La.1958); Gibson v. State, 03-1112, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2/10/04), 866 So.2d 375, 378 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Hall v. Brookshire Bros., Ltd.
green
1 sentence2005Dr. Patton settled in this case for the statutory amount of $100,000. [3] In Hall, supra, the jury was allowed to consider the third party fault of a Brookshire Brothers pharmacist following payment by the qualified health care provider of his statutory maximum of $100,000, with a full reservation of rights against the PCF. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Miller v. Southern Baptist Hospital
neutral
1 sentence2003See for example McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc., 01-1270, 01-1271, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/26/02), 810 So.2d 1283, 1288 (holding that the PCF does not have the right to raise exceptions after the limitation of liability has been satisfied because to allow it to do so “would be to permit it to raise defenses only given to a Defendant, which it is not”), writ denied, 02-1344 (La.11/27/02), 831 So.2d 284 ; Miller v. S. Baptist Hosp., 00-1352, p. 12 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/01), 806 So.2d 10, 19 (holding that the PCF “does not have the standing to raise the issue of prescription/peremption”), writ de | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Ginn v. Woman's Hospital Foundation, Inc.
green
1 sentence2003The interpretation set forth in Ginn, supra, is controlling in this matter and requires reversal of the trial court's judgment granting the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment, overruling the PCF's objection to participation in the settlement by the health care provider, and approving the settlement. [4] The PCF asserts that in the absence of strict compliance with La. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Tucker v. Lain
green
1 sentence2003See for example McGrath v. Excel Home Care, Inc., 01-1270, 01-1271, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/26/02), 810 So.2d 1283, 1288 (holding that the PCF does not have the right to raise exceptions after the limitation of liability has been satisfied because to allow it to do so “would be to permit it to raise defenses only given to a Defendant, which it is not”), writ denied, 02-1344 (La.11/27/02), 831 So.2d 284 ; Miller v. S. Baptist Hosp., 00-1352, p. 12 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/21/01), 806 So.2d 10, 19 (holding that the PCF “does not have the standing to raise the issue of prescription/peremption”), writ de | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Medical Review Panel v. Uhs
neutral
1 sentence2002Cf. Batson v. Cherokee Beach and Campgrounds, Inc., 530 So.2d 1128 (La.1988) and In re Medical Review Panel of Wempren v. UHS of New Orleans, Inc., 98-636 (La.App. 5th Cir.1/26/99), 726 So.2d 477 , writ denied 99-0545 (La.4/9/99), 740 So.2d 636 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Medical Review Panel of Wempren v. UHS of New Orleans, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2002Cf. Batson v. Cherokee Beach and Campgrounds, Inc., 530 So.2d 1128 (La.1988) and In re Medical Review Panel of Wempren v. UHS of New Orleans, Inc., 98-636 (La.App. 5th Cir.1/26/99), 726 So.2d 477 , writ denied 99-0545 (La.4/9/99), 740 So.2d 636 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Batson v. Cherokee Beach and Campgrounds, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002Cf. Batson v. Cherokee Beach and Campgrounds, Inc., 530 So.2d 1128 (La.1988) and In re Medical Review Panel of Wempren v. UHS of New Orleans, Inc., 98-636 (La.App. 5th Cir.1/26/99), 726 So.2d 477 , writ denied 99-0545 (La.4/9/99), 740 So.2d 636 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
LeBlanc v. Barry
green
1 sentence2001For the reasons, set forth in LeBlanc v. Barry, 00-709 (La.App. 3 Cir. 8/30/00) ; 771 So.2d 696 , writ denied, 00-2638 (La.11/17/00); 774 So.2d 977 , we find no error with the trial court's granting the PCF's motion to intervene and appeal. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
LeBlanc v. Barry
neutral
1 sentence2001For the reasons, set forth in LeBlanc v. Barry, 00-709 (La.App. 3 Cir. 8/30/00) ; 771 So.2d 696 , writ denied, 00-2638 (La.11/17/00); 774 So.2d 977 , we find no error with the trial court's granting the PCF's motion to intervene and appeal. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Dodson v. Community Blood Center
green
1 sentence1997In doing so, the Taylors have the right to use any information gained through pre-trial discovery devices, including that gained from discovery occurring prior to PCF's involvement in the suit, as in any civil litigation. *1121 See Dodson, 633 So.2d 252 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Bower v. Schumpert Medical Center
green
1 sentence1993In Bower, supra, a factually similar case, we found to be invalid the PCF's rule prohibiting payment to medical malpractice victim's relatives for nursing care and custodial care, and that the three-prong Tanner test is the proper one to be applied in determining whether to allow payment for such services. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.