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.
9 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 1961–1973 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 |
|---|---|---|
Parks v. Hallgreen2 sentences1966The landmark case of Parks v. Hall, 189 La. 849 , 181 So. 191 (1938) is controlling as to one of the legal principles presented by the foregoing “omnibus clause.” It held that when the named insured has once granted permission to someone to use the insured vehicle, his permittee becomes an insured under the omnibus clause, even though he later ignores the named insured’s instructions as to the purpose for which the insured vehicle is to be used. 1966The landmark case of Parks v. Hall, 189 La. 849 , 181 So. 191 (1938) is controlling as to one of the legal principles presented by the foregoing “omnibus clause.” It held that when the named insured has once granted permission to someone to use the insured vehicle, his permittee becomes an insured under the omnibus clause, even though he later ignores the named insured’s instructions as to the purpose for which the insured vehicle is to be used. | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
McConnell v. Travelers Indemnity Company
green
2 sentences1973In McConnell v. Travelers Indemnity Company, 248 La. 509 , 180 So.2d 406 , the court summarized the rule of law governing cases of this type and stated: "Pertinent here is the well-established rule that initial permission from the named insured to use an automobile is sufficient to make the driver an insured under the omnibus clause. 1973In McConnell v. Travelers Indemnity Company, 248 La. 509 , 180 So.2d 406 , the court summarized the rule of law governing cases of this type and stated: "Pertinent here is the well-established rule that initial permission from the named insured to use an automobile is sufficient to make the driver an insured under the omnibus clause. | 4 | 1969–1973 |
Rogillio v. Cazedessus
green
2 sentences1968The holding of the court seems to be more in keeping with the position of Justice Sanders, dissenting [concurring] in Rogillio v. Cazedes-sus, than with the majority opinion.” Justice Sanders in the case of Rogillio v. Cazedessus, 241 La. 186 , 127 So.2d 734 (1961), in a concurring opinion, very ably stated the initial permission rule in the following language: “Concisely stated, this doctrine is that initial permission, express or implied, is sufficient to constitute the operator of a vehicle an insured under the omnibus clause. 1968The holding of the court seems to be more in keeping with the position of Justice Sanders, dissenting [concurring] in Rogillio v. Cazedes-sus, than with the majority opinion.” Justice Sanders in the case of Rogillio v. Cazedessus, 241 La. 186 , 127 So.2d 734 (1961), in a concurring opinion, very ably stated the initial permission rule in the following language: “Concisely stated, this doctrine is that initial permission, express or implied, is sufficient to constitute the operator of a vehicle an insured under the omnibus clause. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Bolton v. North River Insurance Company
green
1 sentence1967Bolton v. North River Insurance Company, 102 So.2d 544 (La.App.1958) presents a situation where a passenger was considered to be an insured under the omnibus clause of a policy. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
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.