codification principle in Louisiana

12 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1968–2016 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.

Followed or applied (2)

Case	Followed	Cited
Edmonston v. A-Second Mortgage Co. of Slidell, Inc.green la · 1974 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999 1 sentence 1999Over twenty years before this codification of the doctrine, the theory underlying the remedy of unjust enrichment was explained by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Edmonston v. A-Second Mortgage Company of Slidell, Inc., 289 So.2d 116, 120 (La.1974): This restitutionary remedy is founded upon principles of unjust enrichment embodied in Civil Code articles 21 and 1965.	1	1
State v. Velezgreen lactapp · 1991 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 1 sentence 1998"Evidence admissible under the res gestae exception to the general inadmissibility of other crimes evidence is not subject to any notice requirements." State v. Velez, 588 So.2d 116, 128 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991), writ denied, 592 So.2d 408 (La.1992), certiorari denied, 505 U.S. 1220 , 112 S.Ct. 3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) citing State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (15)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Taylor green la · 2003 2 sentences 2016Simply put, “[r]es gestae events constituting other crimes are deemed admissible because they are so nearly connected to the charged [ 22offense that the state could not accurately present its case without reference to them.” State v. Taylor, 01-1638, p. 10 (La. 1/14/03), 838 So.2d 729, 741 . 2012State v. Brown, 03-1616, p. 10 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/31/04), 871 So.2d 1240,1247 . 15 In State v. Taylor, 01-1638 (La.1/14/03), 838 So.2d 729 , the Court further explained the admissibility of res gestae and evidence of “other crimes, wrongs, or acts” pursuant to La.	2	2012–2016
Moody v. Arabie green la · 1986 2 sentences 1997This section was a codification of the doctrine enunciated by this Court in Moody v. Arabie, supra, wherein we held that the plaintiff and the intervenor compensation insurer were co-owners of the right to recover damages from the third party and that the co-owners were obligated to bear their proportionate share of the reasonable attorney fees, according to their interests in the recovery. 498 So.2d at 1085 . 1997This section was a codification of the doctrine enunciated by this Court in Moody v. Arabie, supra, wherein we held that the plaintiff and the intervenor compensation insurer were co-owners of the right to recover damages from the third party and that the co-owners were obligated to bear their proportionate share of the reasonable attorney fees, according to their interests in the recovery. 498 So.2d at 1085 .	2	1996–1997
State v. Berry green la · 1975 2 sentences 1994The codification of that rule is found in LSA-R.S. 14:14, and in finding 267 that the rule was not constitutionally offensive, Justice Tate in State v. Berry, 324 So.2d 822 (La.1976), stated: `Our legislature has by La.R.S. 14:14 expressly adopted the M'Naughten test of insanity. 1979*The codification of that rule is found in LSA-R.S. 14:14, and in finding that the rule was not constitutionally offensive, Justice Tate in State v. Berry, 324 So.2d 822 (La.1976), stated: "Our legislature has by La.R.S. 14:14 expressly adopted the M'Naughten test of insanity.	2	1979–1994
State v. Brown green lactapp · 2004 1 sentence 2012State v. Brown, 03-1616, p. 10 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/31/04), 871 So.2d 1240,1247 . 15 In State v. Taylor, 01-1638 (La.1/14/03), 838 So.2d 729 , the Court further explained the admissibility of res gestae and evidence of “other crimes, wrongs, or acts” pursuant to La.	1	2012–2012
State v. Colomb green la · 1999 1 sentence 2000The emphasized portion of the provision above is the codification of the principle of "res gestae." Pursuant to the res gestae exception, evidence of another crime is admissible "when it is related and intertwined with the charged offense to such an extent that the State could not have accurately presented its case without reference to the other crime." State v. Colomb, 98-2813. p. 3 (La.10/1/99), 747 So.2d 1074, 1075 ; State v. Powell, 98-0278, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/99), 746 So.2d 825, 829 .	1	2000–2000
State v. Powell neutral lactapp · 1999 1 sentence 2000The emphasized portion of the provision above is the codification of the principle of "res gestae." Pursuant to the res gestae exception, evidence of another crime is admissible "when it is related and intertwined with the charged offense to such an extent that the State could not have accurately presented its case without reference to the other crime." State v. Colomb, 98-2813. p. 3 (La.10/1/99), 747 So.2d 1074, 1075 ; State v. Powell, 98-0278, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/99), 746 So.2d 825, 829 .	1	2000–2000
State v. Davis neutral lactapp · 1999 1 sentence 2000C.E. art. 404(B)(1) is the codification of the principle of "res gestae." Id.	1	2000–2000
State v. Brooks green la · 1999 1 sentence 2000C.E. art. 404(B)(1) is the codification of the principle of "res gestae." See id.	1	2000–2000
State v. Velez green la · 1992 1 sentence 1998"Evidence admissible under the res gestae exception to the general inadmissibility of other crimes evidence is not subject to any notice requirements." State v. Velez, 588 So.2d 116, 128 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991), writ denied, 592 So.2d 408 (La.1992), certiorari denied, 505 U.S. 1220 , 112 S.Ct. 3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) citing State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).	1	1998–1998
State v. Prieur red la · 1973 1 sentence 1998"Evidence admissible under the res gestae exception to the general inadmissibility of other crimes evidence is not subject to any notice requirements." State v. Velez, 588 So.2d 116, 128 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991), writ denied, 592 So.2d 408 (La.1992), certiorari denied, 505 U.S. 1220 , 112 S.Ct. 3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) citing State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).	1	1998–1998
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Southern California Rapid Transit District green scotus · 1992 1 sentence 1998"Evidence admissible under the res gestae exception to the general inadmissibility of other crimes evidence is not subject to any notice requirements." State v. Velez, 588 So.2d 116, 128 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991), writ denied, 592 So.2d 408 (La.1992), certiorari denied, 505 U.S. 1220 , 112 S.Ct. 3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) citing State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).	1	1998–1998
Lucas v. Schneider National Carriers, Inc. green scotus · 1992 1 sentence 1998"Evidence admissible under the res gestae exception to the general inadmissibility of other crimes evidence is not subject to any notice requirements." State v. Velez, 588 So.2d 116, 128 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991), writ denied, 592 So.2d 408 (La.1992), certiorari denied, 505 U.S. 1220 , 112 S.Ct. 3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) citing State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).	1	1998–1998
Ellis v. United States green scotus · 1992 1 sentence 1998"Evidence admissible under the res gestae exception to the general inadmissibility of other crimes evidence is not subject to any notice requirements." State v. Velez, 588 So.2d 116, 128 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991), writ denied, 592 So.2d 408 (La.1992), certiorari denied, 505 U.S. 1220 , 112 S.Ct. 3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) citing State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).	1	1998–1998
Degruise v. Houma Courier Newspaper Corp. green lactapp · 1995 1 sentence 1997The appellate court held that, for the purposes of the application of this rule, “[i]t is of no moment that, through mere coincidence, Federated was the worker’s compensation insurer as well as the insurer.” 694 So.2d 273, 277 .	1	1997–1997
Agee v. Brent neutral la · 1913 2 sentences 1968Under the latter of the aforesaid articles it was commented by the redactors of the Code of Civil Procedure that the article was a codification of the rule announced in Agee v. Brent, 132 La. 821 , 61 So. 837 (1913). 1968Under the latter of the aforesaid articles it was commented by the redactors of the Code of Civil Procedure that the article was a codification of the rule announced in Agee v. Brent, 132 La. 821 , 61 So. 837 (1913).	1	1968–1968

Statutes the citing opinions construe

LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 15:529.1 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 37 (1927–2025) GA 26 (1906–2016) FL 17 (1983–2017) NY 16 (1908–2015) TX 15 (1978–2015) PA 14 (1992–2022) LA 12 (1968–2016) OR 12 (1977–2021) IL 12 (1971–2009) OH 10 (1968–2023) KY 8 (1983–2024) KS 5 (1972–2026) UT 5 (1979–2024) NM 5 (1987–2021) MT 5 (1981–2008) AL 5 (1936–2014) IN 4 (1995–2019) AK 4 (1980–2013) AZ 3 (1990–2014) MD 3 (1977–2007) VA 3 (1982–2025) WV 3 (2005–2024) NC 3 (1986–1992) CO 3 (1981–1992) OK 2 (1977–1997) AR 2 (1997–2012) MS 2 (1998–1999) MO 2 (1987–2021) DC 2 (1995–2008) MN 2 (2003–2003) HI 2 (1995–1995) WI 2 (1968–1981) WA 2 (1997–2021) MI 2 (1971–2020)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check

Your account

Appearance