position rule in Louisiana

2006Trosclair v. Trosclair, 337 So.2d 1216 (La.App. 1 Cir.1976).

1981The trial judge having observed the demeanor of the witnesses is in the better position to rule on their credibility." Trosclair v. Trosclair, 337 So.2d 1216 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1976).

2011Mizell v. Mizell, 37,004 (La.App.2d Cir.03/07/03), 839 So.2d 1222 .

2010Mizell v. Mizell, 37,004 (La.App.2d Cir.03/07/03), 839 So.2d 1222 .

1981As authority for this position the defense relies upon Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968).

1981As authority for this position the defense relies upon Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968).

1958The court said: "`But being forcibly reminded by their knowledge of jurisprudence, of the doctrine of "Contra non valentem," etc., which had been practically recognized in the early stages of our jurisprudence, they hastily retreat on the position that the doctrine is inconsistent with the spirit of our legislation, and they intrench themselves within the protection of the decision in the case of Smith v. Stewart, 21 La.Ann. 67 , 99 Am.Dec. 709, in which the court, as then composed, laid down the opinion that the doctrine had no application in our system of jurisprudence, which admits of no ot

1916The court said: “But, being forcibly reminded, by their knowledge of jurisprudence, of the doctrine of ‘Contra non valentem,’ etc., which had been practically recognized in the early stages of our jurisprudence, they hastily retreat on the position that the doctrine is inconsistent with the spirit of our legislation, and they intrench themselves within the protection of the decision in the case of Smith v. Stewart, 21 La.

2024Hall, 67 So.3d at 639 .

1996Id., Pearce v. Pearce, 348 So.2d 75, 78 (La.1977).

1984Pearce v. Pearce, 348 So.2d 75 (La.1977); Kean v. Kean, 388 So.2d 398 (La.App. 1st Cir.1980).

1983We refer to Smith v. Smith, 289 So.2d 271 (La.App. 1st Cir.1973).

1983Blackwell v. Blackwell, 413 So.2d 1331 (La.App. 1st Cir., 1982).

1981"The factual findings of the trial court are therefore to be accorded very substantial weight on review." Gilberti v. Gilberti, 338 So.2d 971 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1976), Canter v. Koehring Company, 283 So.2d 716 (La.1973).

1981"The factual findings of the trial court are therefore to be accorded very substantial weight on review." Gilberti v. Gilberti, 338 So.2d 971 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1976), Canter v. Koehring Company, 283 So.2d 716 (La.1973).

1980In Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 , 77 S.Ct. 1304 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1498 (1957), the United States Supreme Court held that an entire book could not be condemned as obscene because of isolated obscene passages in it.

1980In Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 , 77 S.Ct. 1304 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1498 (1957), the United States Supreme Court held that an entire book could not be condemned as obscene because of isolated obscene passages in it.

1980This Louisiana code provision has given rise to few reported appellate decisions, corroborating the writer’s general observation that it has worked well in practice and that its application is in general accord with its intent and with the federal applications.” (Emphasis supplied) In McCauley v. Manda Brothers Provisions Co., 202 So.2d 492 (La.App.1967), in reference to Code of Civil Procedure Article 1636, the court stated concerning the appellate court’s treatment of testimony proffered in the trial court: “... appellate court is in a position to rule on the admissibility of the evidence, b

1975Plaintiff also points out that the permit which was issued to Winston Carriers authorizing this particular trailer to be towed provided that the wide load should not "infringe upon the opposite bound lane of a two lane pavement." She takes the position that this requirement was a safety measure designed to protect life and property on the highway, and that a violation of that provision *825 is negligence per se, citing Dixie Drive-it-Yourself v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (1962).

1975Plaintiff also points out that the permit which was issued to Winston Carriers authorizing this particular trailer to be towed provided that the wide load should not "infringe upon the opposite bound lane of a two lane pavement." She takes the position that this requirement was a safety measure designed to protect life and property on the highway, and that a violation of that provision *825 is negligence per se, citing Dixie Drive-it-Yourself v. American Beverage Company, 242 La. 471 , 137 So.2d 298 (1962).

1970Defendants also cite Corcoran v. Banner Super Mkt., Inc., 20 A.D.2d 552 , 245 N.Y.S. 2d 175 (1963), which declined, with two judges dissenting, to apply res ipsa in a suit against a building owner for damages from a falling board which had been affixed to defendant's building and an adjacent building.

1970Defendants also cite Corcoran v. Banner Super Mkt., Inc., 20 A.D.2d 552 , 245 N.Y.S. 2d 175 (1963), which declined, with two judges dissenting, to apply res ipsa in a suit against a building owner for damages from a falling board which had been affixed to defendant's building and an adjacent building.

1967Defendant relies on the case of Fawvor v. United States Oil of Louisiana, Inc., (La.App.1964) 162 So.2d 602 , which holds with reference to the plaintiff-lessor urging failure on the part of the lessee to operate as a reasonable and prudent operator that: "(5) A motion to strike this contention was sustained by the trial judge.

1958"In Succession of Ball, 43 La.Ann. 342 , 9 So. 45 , held that prescription does not begin to run against an action for reduction of an excessive donation until the solvency or insolvency of the succession has been ascertained.

1954He would then have been in a position to claim the benefit of Article 2652.” Cucullu v. Hernandez, 103 U.S. 105, 117 , 26 L.Ed. 322 .

1954He would then have been in a position to claim the benefit of Article 2652.” Cucullu v. Hernandez, 103 U.S. 105, 117 , 26 L.Ed. 322 .

1928State v. Louviere, No. 29017, 115 So. 914 . 1 Bills Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 all relate to the admission of certain testimony offered by the State as rebuttal testimony, over the objection of the defendant that said testimony was not m rebuttal of any evidence offered by the defendant, but was substantive, independent evidence which should have been offered in chief.

1928Gravel Logging Co., 152 La. 993 , 95 South. 99 , we hold that plaintiff was not an independent contractor, but he was an employee of the defendant company and therefore in a position to claim the benefit of the Employers’ Liability Act.

1928Gravel Logging Co., 152 La. 993 , 95 South. 99 , we hold that plaintiff was not an independent contractor, but he was an employee of the defendant company and therefore in a position to claim the benefit of the Employers’ Liability Act.