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.
6 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wolfe v. Shreveport Gas, Electric Light & Power Co.green2 sentences2016Defendants cite this court’s holding in Pichón v. Asbestos Defendants, 10-0570, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/10), 52 So.3d 240, 244 , that “[a] threshold require ment to trigger a determination of whether successor liability is applicable under the ‘continuation’ exception is that one corporation must have purchased ‘all’ the assets of another.” 9 Defendants note that it is undisputed no asset transfer occurred between Gee Cee Group and Gee Cee LA.. 10 Boes counters that an asset transfer is not absolutely required for Gee Cee LA to be found responsible for Gee Cee Group’s debt to Boes. |inThe t 2016Defendants cite this court’s holding in Pichón v. Asbestos Defendants, 10-0570, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/10), 52 So.3d 240, 244 , that “[a] threshold require ment to trigger a determination of whether successor liability is applicable under the ‘continuation’ exception is that one corporation must have purchased ‘all’ the assets of another.” 9 Defendants note that it is undisputed no asset transfer occurred between Gee Cee Group and Gee Cee LA.. 10 Boes counters that an asset transfer is not absolutely required for Gee Cee LA to be found responsible for Gee Cee Group’s debt to Boes. |inThe t | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pichon v. Asbestos
green
2 sentences2019Id., citing Pichon v. Asbestos Defendants, 2010- 0570, p. 6 ( La.App. 4th Cir. 11/ 17/ 10), 52 So. 3d 240, 244 , wit denied, 2010- 2771 ( La. 2/ 4/ 11), 57 So. 3d 317 ; Camsoft Data Systems, Inc. v. Southern Electronics Supply, Inc., 2019- 0732, p. 7 ( La. 2016Defendants cite this court’s holding in Pichón v. Asbestos Defendants, 10-0570, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/10), 52 So.3d 240, 244 , that “[a] threshold require ment to trigger a determination of whether successor liability is applicable under the ‘continuation’ exception is that one corporation must have purchased ‘all’ the assets of another.” 9 Defendants note that it is undisputed no asset transfer occurred between Gee Cee Group and Gee Cee LA.. 10 Boes counters that an asset transfer is not absolutely required for Gee Cee LA to be found responsible for Gee Cee Group’s debt to Boes. |inThe t | 2 | 2016–2019 |
Bourque v. Lehmann Lathe, Inc.
green
1 sentence2019Id., citing Pichon v. Asbestos Defendants, 2010- 0570, p. 6 ( La.App. 4th Cir. 11/ 17/ 10), 52 So. 3d 240, 244 , wit denied, 2010- 2771 ( La. 2/ 4/ 11), 57 So. 3d 317 ; Camsoft Data Systems, Inc. v. Southern Electronics Supply, Inc., 2019- 0732, p. 7 ( La. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Pichon v. Asbestos 2010-2771 (La. 2/4/11)
neutral
1 sentence2019Id., citing Pichon v. Asbestos Defendants, 2010- 0570, p. 6 ( La.App. 4th Cir. 11/ 17/ 10), 52 So. 3d 240, 244 , wit denied, 2010- 2771 ( La. 2/ 4/ 11), 57 So. 3d 317 ; Camsoft Data Systems, Inc. v. Southern Electronics Supply, Inc., 2019- 0732, p. 7 ( La. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Willis v. Department of Health & Human Resources
neutral
1 sentence2017The Commission also relied on Willis v. Dept. of Health & Human Resources, 434 So.2d 1164 (La. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Biller v. Snug Harbor Jazz Bistro of Louisiana, L.L.C.
neutral
1 sentence2016Defendants cite this court’s holding in Pichón v. Asbestos Defendants, 10-0570, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 11/17/10), 52 So.3d 240, 244 , that “[a] threshold require ment to trigger a determination of whether successor liability is applicable under the ‘continuation’ exception is that one corporation must have purchased ‘all’ the assets of another.” 9 Defendants note that it is undisputed no asset transfer occurred between Gee Cee Group and Gee Cee LA.. 10 Boes counters that an asset transfer is not absolutely required for Gee Cee LA to be found responsible for Gee Cee Group’s debt to Boes. |inThe t | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Navarre v. K-MART
neutral
1 sentence2004Navarre, 01-753 at pp. 6-7, 803 So.2d at 210 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Barrilleaux v. NPC, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence1999Barrilleaux v. NPC, Inc., 97-2040, p. 4 (La.App. 1 Cir 12/29/97); 704 So.2d 449, 451 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas
green
1 sentence1994In In re Grand Jury Subpoenas, 363 So.2d 651 (La.1978), the witnesses' failure to reappear for the continuation of a hearing before the grand jury was found to be a constructive contempt. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.