10 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
LA. HOTEL-MOTEL ASS'N v. Parish of East Baton Rougegreen2 sentences2011In applying Hunt , the Louisiana Supreme Court has held that to meet the first prong of the Hunt test, the association must first establish harm that is not only "present or probable for the future," but also establish harm that would occur to the members themselves. [3] Louisiana Hotel-Motel, 385 So.2d at 1197 . 2011In applying Hunt , the Louisiana Supreme Court has held that to meet the first prong of the Hunt test, the association must first establish harm that is not only "present or probable for the future," but also establish harm that would occur to the members themselves. [3] Louisiana Hotel-Motel, 385 So.2d at 1197 . | 2 | 3 |
Redfearn v. Creppelgreen2 sentences2011See id. [6] The second prong of the Hunt test, whether the interests Appellants seek to protect are relevant to the organizations' purpose, has arguably been established, as the VCPORA's mission statement references "preserv[ing] the Vieux Carre as a national treasure, to maintain its quaint and distinctive character, and to achieve in that historic, living neighborhood, a quality of life which can be enjoyed by its residents, fellow citizens, businesses, and visitors." Similarly, the FQCPRQ's mission is "to preserve the residential quality in the French Quarter, as well as the historical char 2011See id. [6] The second prong of the Hunt test, whether the interests Appellants seek to protect are relevant to the organizations' purpose, has arguably been established, as the VCPORA's mission statement references "preserv[ing] the Vieux Carre as a national treasure, to maintain its quaint and distinctive character, and to achieve in that historic, living neighborhood, a quality of life which can be enjoyed by its residents, fellow citizens, businesses, and visitors." Similarly, the FQCPRQ's mission is "to preserve the residential quality in the French Quarter, as well as the historical char | 1 | 1 |
Di Mare v. Crescigreen2 sentences1987In Hunt , because the manufacturer knew of the risk of danger, the court did not have to address the implications of the manufacturer's inability to foresee the risk." 47 La.L.Rev. 637 at 643. [17] Overruled on other grounds in Mile High Fence Company v. Radovich, 175 Colo. 537 , 489 P.2d 308 , 311 (1971). [18] Overruled on other grounds in DiMare v. Cresci, 58 Cal.2d 292 , 23 Cal.Rptr. 772 , 373 P.2d 860, 864 (1962). [19] "` (1) It may be inferred that harm suffered by the plaintiff is caused by negligence of the defendant when "(a) the event is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in th 1987In Hunt , because the manufacturer knew of the risk of danger, the court did not have to address the implications of the manufacturer's inability to foresee the risk." 47 La.L.Rev. 637 at 643. [17] Overruled on other grounds in Mile High Fence Company v. Radovich, 175 Colo. 537 , 489 P.2d 308 , 311 (1971). [18] Overruled on other grounds in DiMare v. Cresci, 58 Cal.2d 292 , 23 Cal.Rptr. 772 , 373 P.2d 860, 864 (1962). [19] "` (1) It may be inferred that harm suffered by the plaintiff is caused by negligence of the defendant when "(a) the event is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in th | 1 | 1 |
Gilbert v. Korvette's Inc.green2 sentences1987In Hunt , because the manufacturer knew of the risk of danger, the court did not have to address the implications of the manufacturer's inability to foresee the risk." 47 La.L.Rev. 637 at 643. [17] Overruled on other grounds in Mile High Fence Company v. Radovich, 175 Colo. 537 , 489 P.2d 308 , 311 (1971). [18] Overruled on other grounds in DiMare v. Cresci, 58 Cal.2d 292 , 23 Cal.Rptr. 772 , 373 P.2d 860, 864 (1962). [19] "` (1) It may be inferred that harm suffered by the plaintiff is caused by negligence of the defendant when "(a) the event is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in th 1987In Hunt , because the manufacturer knew of the risk of danger, the court did not have to address the implications of the manufacturer's inability to foresee the risk." 47 La.L.Rev. 637 at 643. [17] Overruled on other grounds in Mile High Fence Company v. Radovich, 175 Colo. 537 , 489 P.2d 308 , 311 (1971). [18] Overruled on other grounds in DiMare v. Cresci, 58 Cal.2d 292 , 23 Cal.Rptr. 772 , 373 P.2d 860, 864 (1962). [19] "` (1) It may be inferred that harm suffered by the plaintiff is caused by negligence of the defendant when "(a) the event is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in th | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Vieux Carre Property Owners, Residents & Associates, Inc. v. Hotel Royal, L.L.C.
green
2 sentences2012We note that the decision in Vieux Carre Property Owners, Residents, and Associates, Inc. v. Hotel Royal, L.L.C., 09-0641 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/3/10) , 55 So.3d 1 (on rehearing), held that the plaintiffs did not satisfy the first prong of the Hunt test because they could not establish a concrete injury to the members of the Association. 2012We note that the decision in Vieux Carre Property Owners, Residents, and Associates, Inc. v. Hotel Royal, L.L.C., 09-0641 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/3/10) , 55 So.3d 1 (on rehearing), held that the plaintiffs did not satisfy the first prong of the Hunt test because they could not establish a concrete injury to the members of the Association. | 4 | 2011–2013 |
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission
green
2 sentences1996Hunt, 432 U.S. at 343 , 97 S.Ct. at 2441 . 3 Applying Hunt to the facts of the case before us, this court in Louisiana Hotel-Motel found the plaintiffs had failed to meet parts (a) and (b) of the Hunt test. 1996Hunt, 432 U.S. at 343 , 97 S.Ct. at 2441 . 3 Applying Hunt to the facts of the case before us, this court in Louisiana Hotel-Motel found the plaintiffs had failed to meet parts (a) and (b) of the Hunt test. | 3 | 1996–2011 |
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, & Agricultural Implement Workers v. Brock
green
2 sentences1996The Supreme Court later reaffirmed and reiterated its Hunt test in International Union, et al. v. Brock, 477 U.S. 274, 106 S.Ct. 2523 , 91 L.Ed.2d 228 (1986) wherein it pointed out the benefits of and policy reasons behind allowing associations to bring suits on behalf of its members. 1996The Supreme Court later reaffirmed and reiterated its Hunt test in International Union, et al. v. Brock, 477 U.S. 274, 106 S.Ct. 2523 , 91 L.Ed.2d 228 (1986) wherein it pointed out the benefits of and policy reasons behind allowing associations to bring suits on behalf of its members. | 2 | 1996–1996 |
Industrial Pipe, Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish Council
neutral
2 sentences2024Id. 2024Id. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Vieux Carre Property Owners & Associates, Inc. v. City of New Orleans
green
2 sentences2011Likewise, Vieux Carre Property Owners and Associates, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, 246 La. 788 , 167 So.2d 367 (La.1964) also pre-dates Hunt and Louisiana Hotel-Motel. 2011Likewise, Vieux Carre Property Owners and Associates, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, 246 La. 788 , 167 So.2d 367 (La.1964) also pre-dates Hunt and Louisiana Hotel-Motel. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
GARDEN DIST. PROP. OWN. ASS'N v. City of New Orleans
green
2 sentences2011Accordingly, the statement in Decatur Hotel that the Association could assert a claim on behalf of its members is best understood as an affirmation of the Louisiana jurisprudence holding that an association may file suit on behalf of its members, provided that all three elements of the Hunt test are satisfied. |sWith respect to Garden District Property Owners Association v. City of New Orleans, et al., 98 So.2d 922 (La.App. 4th Cir.1957), it is important to note that it was decided two decades prior to Hunt decision; thus, the Court did not conduct the three-part test when determining whether 2011Accordingly, the statement in Decatur Hotel that the Association could assert a claim on behalf of its members is best understood as an affirmation of the Louisiana jurisprudence holding that an association may file suit on behalf of its members, provided that all three elements of the Hunt test are satisfied. |sWith respect to Garden District Property Owners Association v. City of New Orleans, et al., 98 So.2d 922 (La.App. 4th Cir.1957), it is important to note that it was decided two decades prior to Hunt decision; thus, the Court did not conduct the three-part test when determining whether | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Ramsey River Road Property Owners Ass'n v. Reeves
green
2 sentences2010Ramsey River Road Property Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. Reeves, 396 So.2d 873 (La.1981). 2010Ramsey River Road Property Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. Reeves, 396 So.2d 873 (La.1981). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Mile High Fence Co. v. Radovich
red
2 sentences1987In Hunt , because the manufacturer knew of the risk of danger, the court did not have to address the implications of the manufacturer's inability to foresee the risk." 47 La.L.Rev. 637 at 643. [17] Overruled on other grounds in Mile High Fence Company v. Radovich, 175 Colo. 537 , 489 P.2d 308 , 311 (1971). [18] Overruled on other grounds in DiMare v. Cresci, 58 Cal.2d 292 , 23 Cal.Rptr. 772 , 373 P.2d 860, 864 (1962). [19] "` (1) It may be inferred that harm suffered by the plaintiff is caused by negligence of the defendant when "(a) the event is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in th 1987In Hunt , because the manufacturer knew of the risk of danger, the court did not have to address the implications of the manufacturer's inability to foresee the risk." 47 La.L.Rev. 637 at 643. [17] Overruled on other grounds in Mile High Fence Company v. Radovich, 175 Colo. 537 , 489 P.2d 308 , 311 (1971). [18] Overruled on other grounds in DiMare v. Cresci, 58 Cal.2d 292 , 23 Cal.Rptr. 772 , 373 P.2d 860, 864 (1962). [19] "` (1) It may be inferred that harm suffered by the plaintiff is caused by negligence of the defendant when "(a) the event is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in th | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Thomas v. W & W CLARKLIFT, INC.
green
1 sentence1980Thomas v. W & W Clarklift, Inc., 365 So.2d 913 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1978); Philip R. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.