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.
7 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Dodsongreen1 sentence2012See Guedry v. Fromenthal, 6 33 So.2d 287, 289 (La.App. 1st Cir.1993) and Salassi v. State, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Administrative Hearing Section, 96-0321 (La.App. 1st Cir.11/15/96), 684 So.2d 1014, 1017-1018 . | 1 | 1 |
Salassi v. STATE, DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETYgreen1 sentence2012See Guedry v. Fromenthal, 6 33 So.2d 287, 289 (La.App. 1st Cir.1993) and Salassi v. State, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Administrative Hearing Section, 96-0321 (La.App. 1st Cir.11/15/96), 684 So.2d 1014, 1017-1018 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Thomasgreen2 sentences1997State v. Thomas, 427 So.2d 428, 435 (La.1982) (on rehearing) (limiting Williamson as it "should not be construed as authorizing appellate review of every alleged constitutional violation and erroneous jury instruction urged first on appeal without timely objection.") 1997State v. Thomas, 427 So.2d 428, 435 (La.1982) (on rehearing) (limiting Williamson as it "should not be construed as authorizing appellate review of every alleged constitutional violation and erroneous jury instruction urged first on appeal without timely objection.") | 1 | 1 |
Duhon v. Boustanygreen1 sentence1975It has been held in the case of Duhon v. Boustany, La.App., 239 So.2d 180, 181 (3 Cir. 1970), that a motion for summary judgment can be based on a plea of prescription. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ames v. Ohle
green
1 sentence2017"The nature of a cause of action must be determined before it can be decided which prescriptive term is applicable." Ames , 2011-1540 at p. 6, 97 So.3d at 391 (citing dela Vergne v. dela Vergne , 99-0364 (La. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Trepagnier
green
1 sentence2015In State v. Trepagnier, 14-0808, p. 5, n. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/19/14), 154 So.3d 670, 673 , we recently explained the correct standard of review that we apply in reviewing a district court’s ruling on a motion to quash; we stated as follows: The standard of review that we apply in reviewing a district court’s ruling on a motion to quash varies based on the types of issues presented. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Sullivan v. Louisiana
green
2 sentences1997Although the comments following § 10.03, Attempt, and § 10.09, Second Degree Murder, discuss the Butler error, a clarification within the text itself is warranted. [2] See Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 306-07 , 111 S.Ct. at 1263 for a listing of errors the Court found amenable to harmless error analysis and see Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , for the much shorter list of errors the Court found would always invalidate the verdict. [3] Although this case is before us via post-conviction proceedings because of trial counsel's failure to object, we note that because we find that the instant error 1997Although the comments following § 10.03, Attempt, and § 10.09, Second Degree Murder, discuss the Butler error, a clarification within the text itself is warranted. [2] See Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 306-07 , 111 S.Ct. at 1263 for a listing of errors the Court found amenable to harmless error analysis and see Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , for the much shorter list of errors the Court found would always invalidate the verdict. [3] Although this case is before us via post-conviction proceedings because of trial counsel's failure to object, we note that because we find that the instant error | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Arizona v. Fulminante
green
2 sentences1997Although the comments following § 10.03, Attempt, and § 10.09, Second Degree Murder, discuss the Butler error, a clarification within the text itself is warranted. [2] See Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 306-07 , 111 S.Ct. at 1263 for a listing of errors the Court found amenable to harmless error analysis and see Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , for the much shorter list of errors the Court found would always invalidate the verdict. [3] Although this case is before us via post-conviction proceedings because of trial counsel's failure to object, we note that because we find that the instant error 1997Although the comments following § 10.03, Attempt, and § 10.09, Second Degree Murder, discuss the Butler error, a clarification within the text itself is warranted. [2] See Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 306-07 , 111 S.Ct. at 1263 for a listing of errors the Court found amenable to harmless error analysis and see Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , for the much shorter list of errors the Court found would always invalidate the verdict. [3] Although this case is before us via post-conviction proceedings because of trial counsel's failure to object, we note that because we find that the instant error | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Williamson
green
2 sentences1997Although the comments following § 10.03, Attempt, and § 10.09, Second Degree Murder, discuss the Butler error, a clarification within the text itself is warranted. [2] See Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 306-07 , 111 S.Ct. at 1263 for a listing of errors the Court found amenable to harmless error analysis and see Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , for the much shorter list of errors the Court found would always invalidate the verdict. [3] Although this case is before us via post-conviction proceedings because of trial counsel's failure to object, we note that because we find that the instant error 1997Although the comments following § 10.03, Attempt, and § 10.09, Second Degree Murder, discuss the Butler error, a clarification within the text itself is warranted. [2] See Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 306-07 , 111 S.Ct. at 1263 for a listing of errors the Court found amenable to harmless error analysis and see Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , for the much shorter list of errors the Court found would always invalidate the verdict. [3] Although this case is before us via post-conviction proceedings because of trial counsel's failure to object, we note that because we find that the instant error | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Sibley v. Board of Sup'rs of Louisiana State University
green
2 sentences1993Chamberlain also addressed the sovereign immunity argument, applying the analysis used by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Sibley v. Board of Supervisors, 462 So.2d 149 (La.1985). 1993Chamberlain also addressed the sovereign immunity argument, applying the analysis used by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Sibley v. Board of Supervisors, 462 So.2d 149 (La.1985). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Chamberlain v. STATE, EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP. AND DEVELOPMENT
neutral
2 sentences1993This court applied the Butler analysis to a challenge to the constitutionality of R.S. 13:5106 in Chamberlain v. State, No. 91 CA 1942, slip op. at 14-16, 1993 WL 225462 (La.App. 1st Cir. Jan. 20, 1993), writ granted, 615 So.2d 333 (La. 1993). 1993This court applied the Butler analysis to a challenge to the constitutionality of R.S. 13:5106 in Chamberlain v. State, No. 91 CA 1942, slip op. at 14-16, 1993 WL 225462 (La.App. 1st Cir. Jan. 20, 1993), writ granted, 615 So.2d 333 (La. 1993). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Chamberlain v. State, Through DOTD
green
2 sentences1993This court applied the Butler analysis to a challenge to the constitutionality of R.S. 13:5106 in Chamberlain v. State, No. 91 CA 1942, slip op. at 14-16, 1993 WL 225462 (La.App. 1st Cir. Jan. 20, 1993), writ granted, 615 So.2d 333 (La. 1993). 1993This court applied the Butler analysis to a challenge to the constitutionality of R.S. 13:5106 in Chamberlain v. State, No. 91 CA 1942, slip op. at 14-16, 1993 WL 225462 (La.App. 1st Cir. Jan. 20, 1993), writ granted, 615 So.2d 333 (La. 1993). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Butler v. Travelers Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence1985Appellees argued that if Bridges had simply exited his truck the open door of the truck “might have warned Fletcher that the vehicle was stopped rather than moving.” Defendant-appellant’s post-trial brief anticipated that plaintiff-appellees would rely on La.R.S. 32:141 and excerpted Butler v. Travelers Insurance Co., supra, arguing that, based on the Butler principle, “it is clear ... that plaintiff is totally lacking in any proof ... to establish ... [Bridges] ... was guilty of violating ... | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.