10 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2016 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State of Louisiana v. Testbankgreen2 sentences2016Guste v. M/V TESTBANK, 752 F.2d 1019, 1023 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 903 , 106 S.Ct. 3271 , 91 L.Ed.2d 562 (1986). 2003The United States Fifth Circuit sitting en banc in State of Louisiana, et al. v. M/V Testbank, 752 F.2d 1019, 1023 (5th Cir. 1985), examined the ruling in Robins, noting it "was a pragmatic limitation imposed by the Court upon the tort doctrine of foreseeability." In Testbank two vessels collided with each other on the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet and caused a chemical spill, resulting in the closure of that outlet for several weeks. | 3 | 3 |
Board of the County Commissioners of Bryan County v. Browngreen1 sentence2002Board of County Commissioners, 117 S.Ct at 1388, 1393 . [Underlining added.] The above test goes far beyond the foreseeability test employed by Louisiana's duty/risk analysisease of association test, and, further, this case does not support an award of punitive damages against a former employer who wrote a generic reference letter for an employee who had no criminal record. | 1 | 1 |
Cahill v. Schultzgreen1 sentence1989Compare Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Wisconsin v. Dixon, 425 So.2d 885 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1983) (concluding that the event in which the aggravation occurs must be reasonably foreseeable) with Cahill, 521 So.2d at 444-446 (Ciaccio, J., dissenting) (stating that what must be foreseeable is the probability of aggravation, that is, the predisposition of the victim to future injury, not the method by which the aggravation is caused). | 1 | 1 |
Emp. Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. of Wis. v. Dixongreen1 sentence1989Compare Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Wisconsin v. Dixon, 425 So.2d 885 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1983) (concluding that the event in which the aggravation occurs must be reasonably foreseeable) with Cahill, 521 So.2d at 444-446 (Ciaccio, J., dissenting) (stating that what must be foreseeable is the probability of aggravation, that is, the predisposition of the victim to future injury, not the method by which the aggravation is caused). | 1 | 1 |
Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Company v. Popegreen1 sentence1985Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So.2d 54 (Fla.1977); see also Pope v. Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 227 (Fla.App. 1st Dist., 1960) cert. denied 127 So.2d 441 (Fla.1961), Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So.2d 14 (Fla.App. 3rd Dist., 1983) and cases cited therein. | 1 | 1 |
Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade Countygreen1 sentence1985Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So.2d 54 (Fla.1977); see also Pope v. Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 227 (Fla.App. 1st Dist., 1960) cert. denied 127 So.2d 441 (Fla.1961), Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So.2d 14 (Fla.App. 3rd Dist., 1983) and cases cited therein. | 1 | 1 |
Pope v. Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Co.green1 sentence1985Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So.2d 54 (Fla.1977); see also Pope v. Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 227 (Fla.App. 1st Dist., 1960) cert. denied 127 So.2d 441 (Fla.1961), Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So.2d 14 (Fla.App. 3rd Dist., 1983) and cases cited therein. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re Gay
green
2 sentences2016Guste v. M/V TESTBANK, 752 F.2d 1019, 1023 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 903 , 106 S.Ct. 3271 , 91 L.Ed.2d 562 (1986). 2006Guste v. M/V TESTBANK, 752 F.2d 1019, 1023 (5th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 903 , 106 S.Ct. 3271 , 91 L.Ed.2d 562 (1986). | 2 | 2006–2016 |
Camacho v. Bunyan
green
2 sentences2016Guste v. M/V TESTBANK, 752 F.2d 1019, 1023 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 903 , 106 S.Ct. 3271 , 91 L.Ed.2d 562 (1986). 2016Guste v. M/V TESTBANK, 752 F.2d 1019, 1023 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 903 , 106 S.Ct. 3271 , 91 L.Ed.2d 562 (1986). | 2 | 2006–2016 |
Dickerson v. Kroger, Inc.
green
1 sentence2009Thus, we reject claimant’s argument that proof of any aggravation of an on-the-job injury by a subsequent accident which is not job related is sufficient to make the employer liable for continued compensation benefits. 8 In this matter, there was simply insufficient proof that the work-related injuries were a cause of the injury suffered away from work, and the hearing officer was manifestly erroneous in failing to so find. *288 In addition to claimant’s argument that the foreseeability requirement was not mentioned by this court in Kelly or otherwise, he argues that in 1989, the legislature 1 | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Consolidated Aluminum Corporation v. C.F. Bean Corporation
green
2 sentences1986We expressly declined to reach the question of "whether Consolidated's claim of negligence would withstand scrutiny under a foreseeability test," 772 F.2d at 1218 n. 2, and left the application of traditional tort principles, including foreseeability and the related concept of legal duty, for the trial court to determine on remand, at 1224. (emphasis added.) [ Consolidated, 772 F.2d at 1224 .] The petition alleges the defendant tug owner was transporting a crane owned by the defendant construction company; the boom on the crane was in a raised position and negligently snagged and tore down ele 1986We expressly declined to reach the question of "whether Consolidated's claim of negligence would withstand scrutiny under a foreseeability test," 772 F.2d at 1218 n. 2, and left the application of traditional tort principles, including foreseeability and the related concept of legal duty, for the trial court to determine on remand, at 1224. (emphasis added.) [ Consolidated, 772 F.2d at 1224 .] The petition alleges the defendant tug owner was transporting a crane owned by the defendant construction company; the boom on the crane was in a raised position and negligently snagged and tore down ele | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc.
green
1 sentence1985Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So.2d 54 (Fla.1977); see also Pope v. Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 227 (Fla.App. 1st Dist., 1960) cert. denied 127 So.2d 441 (Fla.1961), Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So.2d 14 (Fla.App. 3rd Dist., 1983) and cases cited therein. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Canter v. Koehring Company
green
1 sentence1979ERROR NO. 1 Under Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978) and Canter v. Koehring Company, 283 So.2d 716 (La.1973) this court must find that there is manifest error in the findings of fact by the trial court before there can be a reversal. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Arceneaux v. Domingue
green
1 sentence1979ERROR NO. 1 Under Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978) and Canter v. Koehring Company, 283 So.2d 716 (La.1973) this court must find that there is manifest error in the findings of fact by the trial court before there can be a reversal. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Chavers v. AR Blossman, Inc.
green
1 sentence1956Blossman, Inc., 45 So.2d 398 , syl. 4. | 1 | 1956–1956 |
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.