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.
8 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1937–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Brady v. Marylandgreen2 sentences1977This second motion to produce exculpatory statements was probably resolved to the satisfaction of the defense, for it is no longer urged, leaving for our consideration the vague and general request contained in the first motion seeking "all evidence to which defendant is entitled under Brady v. Maryland ." A pertinent general pronouncement in Brady v. Maryland is that "suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution 1977This second motion to produce exculpatory statements was probably resolved to the satisfaction of the defense, for it is no longer urged, leaving for our consideration the vague and general request contained in the first motion seeking "all evidence to which defendant is entitled under Brady v. Maryland ." A pertinent general pronouncement in Brady v. Maryland is that "suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cotton v. GAYLORD CHEMICAL CORP.
green
2 sentences2005Billieson, supra (citing Cotton v. Gaylord Container, 96-1958 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/27/97) , 691 So.2d 760 , writ denied, 97-0800 (La.4/8/97); 693 So.2d 147 ); Dumas v. Angus Chem. 2002Billieson, 729 So.2d 146 (citing Cotton v. Gaylord Container, 96-1958 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/27/97) ; 691 So.2d 760 , writ denied, 97-0800 (La.4/8/97); 693 So.2d 147 ; Dumas v. Angus Chem. | 2 | 2002–2005 |
Cotton v. Gaylord Container
green
2 sentences2005Billieson, supra (citing Cotton v. Gaylord Container, 96-1958 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/27/97) , 691 So.2d 760 , writ denied, 97-0800 (La.4/8/97); 693 So.2d 147 ); Dumas v. Angus Chem. 2002Billieson, 729 So.2d 146 (citing Cotton v. Gaylord Container, 96-1958 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/27/97) ; 691 So.2d 760 , writ denied, 97-0800 (La.4/8/97); 693 So.2d 147 ; Dumas v. Angus Chem. | 2 | 2002–2005 |
River Bend Capital, LLC v. Lloyd's of London
green
1 sentence2013River Bend Capital, L.L.C. v. Lloyd’s of London, 2010-1317 (La.App. 4th Cir.4/13/11), 63 So.3d 1092, 1094 , writ denied, 2011-0986 (La.6/24/11), 64 So.3d 219 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Wilson v. Allums
neutral
1 sentence2013River Bend Capital, L.L.C. v. Lloyd’s of London, 2010-1317 (La.App. 4th Cir.4/13/11), 63 So.3d 1092, 1094 , writ denied, 2011-0986 (La.6/24/11), 64 So.3d 219 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. LaCaze
green
1 sentence2007LaCaze , XXXX-XXXX p. 19, 824 So.2d at 1078 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Billieson v. City of New Orleans
green
1 sentence2002Billieson, 729 So.2d 146 (citing Cotton v. Gaylord Container, 96-1958 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/27/97) ; 691 So.2d 760 , writ denied, 97-0800 (La.4/8/97); 693 So.2d 147 ; Dumas v. Angus Chem. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Roberts v. Benoit
green
1 sentence1993Indeed, the satisfaction of this inquiry “has proved to be a herculean task for the judiciary in all places and all times.” Roberts, 605 So.2d at 1052 . | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Finn v. EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY ASSURANCE CORPORATION
green
1 sentence1983Where the remedies afforded are inconsistent, it is the election of one of such remedies which operates as a bar; but where the remedies afforded are consistent it is the satisfaction of the claim which operates as a bar." 141 So.2d at 863 quoting from 28 C.J.S., "Election of Remedies" Section 3, p. 1063 (emphasis supplied by the court). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Moore v. Illinois
green
2 sentences1977This second motion to produce exculpatory statements was probably resolved to the satisfaction of the defense, for it is no longer urged, leaving for our consideration the vague and general request contained in the first motion seeking "all evidence to which defendant is entitled under Brady v. Maryland ." A pertinent general pronouncement in Brady v. Maryland is that "suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution 1977This second motion to produce exculpatory statements was probably resolved to the satisfaction of the defense, for it is no longer urged, leaving for our consideration the vague and general request contained in the first motion seeking "all evidence to which defendant is entitled under Brady v. Maryland ." A pertinent general pronouncement in Brady v. Maryland is that "suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Logan v. State Gravel Co.
green
2 sentences1937Rents and revenues of an immovable are included within the meaning and contemplation of the word “fruits” as used in article 466 (Lamorere v. Cox, 32 La.Ann. 1045 ) and it is immaterial whether the rental consideration be termed “royalty” rather than “rent” (Logan v. State Gravel Co., 158 La. 105 , 103 So. 526 ), and the seizing creditor of the immovable, while the property is under seizure, is entitled to have the fruit thereof applied towards the satisfaction of his claim. 1937Rents and revenues of an immovable are included within the meaning and contemplation of the word “fruits” as used in article 466 (Lamorere v. Cox, 32 La.Ann. 1045 ) and it is immaterial whether the rental consideration be termed “royalty” rather than “rent” (Logan v. State Gravel Co., 158 La. 105 , 103 So. 526 ), and the seizing creditor of the immovable, while the property is under seizure, is entitled to have the fruit thereof applied towards the satisfaction of his claim. | 1 | 1937–1937 |
Lamorere v. Cox
green
1 sentence1937Rents and revenues of an immovable are included within the meaning and contemplation of the word “fruits” as used in article 466 (Lamorere v. Cox, 32 La.Ann. 1045 ) and it is immaterial whether the rental consideration be termed “royalty” rather than “rent” (Logan v. State Gravel Co., 158 La. 105 , 103 So. 526 ), and the seizing creditor of the immovable, while the property is under seizure, is entitled to have the fruit thereof applied towards the satisfaction of his claim. | 1 | 1937–1937 |
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.