plaintiff must prove standard (Louisiana) · Go Syfert
← Louisiana issues

plaintiff must prove standard in Louisiana

12 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 1968–2019 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)

CaseFollowedCited
Smith v. State Through Dept. HHRgreen
la · 1988 · cited in 2 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1994–2005
2 sentences

2005Allello v. Smith, 94-103, (La. 5th Cir.7/26/94), 641 So.2d 664 , citing Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988).

1994Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988).

22
Soteropulos v. Schmidtgreen
lactapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
1 sentence

1996La.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 9:2794 A; Pfiffner , 94-0924, p. 8, 643 So.2d'at 1233; Soteropulos v. Schmidt, 556 So.2d 276, 278 (La.App. 4th Cir.1990).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (13)

CaseCitedYears
Samaha v. Rau green
la · 2008
1 sentence

2019R.S. 9:2794 and in Samaha v. Rau, 2007-1726 (La. 2/26/08), 977 So. 2d 880 : the plaintiff must prove the standard of care, breach, and causal connection.

12019–2019
Smith v. State Dept. of Health & Hosp. green
la · 1996
1 sentence

2019Further, the burden of proof in a lost-chance-of-survival case is that stated in Smith v. State, 95-0038 (La. 6/25/96), 676 So. 2d 543 , and Benefield v. Sibley, 43,317 (La.

12019–2019
Stamps v. Dunham green
lactapp · 2007
2 sentences

2012“Malpractice claims are subject to the general rules of proof applicable to any negligence action: the plaintiff must prove a standard of care, a breach of that standard, causation, and damages.” Id.

2012Stamps v. Dunham, 07-0095, p. 4 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/19/07), 968 So.2d 739, 743 .

12012–2012
Carey v. Rao neutral
lactapp · 2002
1 sentence

2006Carey v. Rao, 2001-1235, p. 10 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/11/02); 828 So.2d 53, 60 .

12006–2006
Alello v. Smith neutral
lactapp · 1994
1 sentence

2005Allello v. Smith, 94-103, (La. 5th Cir.7/26/94), 641 So.2d 664 , citing Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988).

12005–2005
Turner v. Stassi neutral
lactapp · 2000
1 sentence

2001Turner v. Stassi, 33,022 (La.App.2d Cir.5/10/00), 759 So.2d 299 .

12001–2001
LeNy v. Friedman green
lactapp · 1979
1 sentence

1986LeNy v. Friedman, 372 So.2d 721 (La.App. 4th Cir.1979), writ denied, 375 So.2d 943 (La.1979).

11986–1986
LeNy v. Friedman green
la · 1979
1 sentence

1986LeNy v. Friedman, 372 So.2d 721 (La.App. 4th Cir.1979), writ denied, 375 So.2d 943 (La.1979).

11986–1986
Southern Discount Company v. Williams green
lactapp · 1969
1 sentence

1979Southern Discount Company v. Williams, 226 So.2d 60 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1969).

11979–1979
Ashford v. Richards neutral
lactapp · 1969
1 sentence

1974Ashford v. Richards, 228 So.2d 530 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1969); Sandel v. Travelers Insurance Company, 225 So.2d 736 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1969); Hall v. St.

11974–1974
Sandel v. Travelers Insurance Company neutral
lactapp · 1969
1 sentence

1974Ashford v. Richards, 228 So.2d 530 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1969); Sandel v. Travelers Insurance Company, 225 So.2d 736 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1969); Hall v. St.

11974–1974
Newsom v. Temple green
lactapp · 1953
1 sentence

1969Newsom v. Temple, La.App., 66 So.2d 357 .

11969–1969
Bailey v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc. neutral
lactapp · 1967
1 sentence

1968Bailey v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., La.App., 198 So.2d 409 .

11968–1968

Statutes the citing opinions construe

LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 9:2794 (4)

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

LA 12 (1968–2019) TX 11 (1980–2025) SC 6 (1992–2026) MO 6 (1984–2017) NY 5 (1994–2014) MS 5 (2000–2016) KS 3 (2000–2001) PA 3 (2003–2020) OH 2 (1992–2025) MI 2 (2021–2023) IL 2 (1981–2019) WA 2 (2021–2023) UT 2 (2025–2026) CT 2 (1999–2001)

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