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 2 courts 1962–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Devenowgreen2 sentences1977Nevertheless, to avoid the occasion of error on the remand for a new trial, we note that, under the facts and in the context of the present general charge, the defendant was entitled to the requested special charges or modifications of the general charge, as represented by the following assignments: Assignment 13 (special charge 3) (the negligent homicide charge), see State v. Devenow, 253 La. 796 , 220 So.2d 78, 83 (syllabus 10) (1969); Assignment 14 (special charge 4) (the charge about a party vouching for the veracity of its witnesses); Assignment 16 (objection to general charge on motive: 1977Nevertheless, to avoid the occasion of error on the remand for a new trial, we note that, under the facts and in the context of the present general charge, the defendant was entitled to the requested special charges or modifications of the general charge, as represented by the following assignments: Assignment 13 (special charge 3) (the negligent homicide charge), see State v. Devenow, 253 La. 796 , 220 So.2d 78, 83 (syllabus 10) (1969); Assignment 14 (special charge 4) (the charge about a party vouching for the veracity of its witnesses); Assignment 16 (objection to general charge on motive: | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Nuccio
green
1 sentence2011Richardson, 92-836 (La.App. 5 Cir. 12/14/94) , 648 So.2d 945 , (citing Nuccio, supra). [snIn State v. Carter, 1997-2902 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/10/00) , 762 So.2d 662, 685 , writ denied, 00-1598 (La.6/15/01), 793 So.2d 1233 , which is cited by the State in support of its contention that explanation of the parameters of the charge would have been necessary, the Fourth Circuit found that the trial court was not required to give the factor regarding the excitement and confusion of the occasion as an instruction because the trial court could have felt the instruction needed further explanation that the | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Richardson
green
1 sentence2011Richardson, 92-836 (La.App. 5 Cir. 12/14/94) , 648 So.2d 945 , (citing Nuccio, supra). [snIn State v. Carter, 1997-2902 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/10/00) , 762 So.2d 662, 685 , writ denied, 00-1598 (La.6/15/01), 793 So.2d 1233 , which is cited by the State in support of its contention that explanation of the parameters of the charge would have been necessary, the Fourth Circuit found that the trial court was not required to give the factor regarding the excitement and confusion of the occasion as an instruction because the trial court could have felt the instruction needed further explanation that the | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Stewart v. PICCADILLY RESTAURANT, INC.
green
1 sentence2011Richardson, 92-836 (La.App. 5 Cir. 12/14/94) , 648 So.2d 945 , (citing Nuccio, supra). [snIn State v. Carter, 1997-2902 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/10/00) , 762 So.2d 662, 685 , writ denied, 00-1598 (La.6/15/01), 793 So.2d 1233 , which is cited by the State in support of its contention that explanation of the parameters of the charge would have been necessary, the Fourth Circuit found that the trial court was not required to give the factor regarding the excitement and confusion of the occasion as an instruction because the trial court could have felt the instruction needed further explanation that the | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Carter
green
1 sentence2011Richardson, 92-836 (La.App. 5 Cir. 12/14/94) , 648 So.2d 945 , (citing Nuccio, supra). [snIn State v. Carter, 1997-2902 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/10/00) , 762 So.2d 662, 685 , writ denied, 00-1598 (La.6/15/01), 793 So.2d 1233 , which is cited by the State in support of its contention that explanation of the parameters of the charge would have been necessary, the Fourth Circuit found that the trial court was not required to give the factor regarding the excitement and confusion of the occasion as an instruction because the trial court could have felt the instruction needed further explanation that the | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc. v. Bookter
green
1 sentence1988App.2d Cir.1979), where inadequate job performance, errors in judgment, some inability to supervise inferior personnel, and some negative personality traits did not constitute deliberate and willful misconduct; and Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc. v. Bookter, 317 So.2d 282 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied 320 So.2d 561 (La.1975), where failure to clock out on a single occasion was a violation of a company policy but it was common practice for the superior in such cases to fill in the time of departure, such failure did not constitute disqualifying misconduct. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Burrell v. Seguros America Banamex, S.A.
green
1 sentence1988App.2d Cir.1979), where inadequate job performance, errors in judgment, some inability to supervise inferior personnel, and some negative personality traits did not constitute deliberate and willful misconduct; and Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc. v. Bookter, 317 So.2d 282 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied 320 So.2d 561 (La.1975), where failure to clock out on a single occasion was a violation of a company policy but it was common practice for the superior in such cases to fill in the time of departure, such failure did not constitute disqualifying misconduct. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Morgan
green
2 sentences1980Though the predecessor to R.S. 14:402 was held constitutional in State v. Morgan, 238 La. 829 , 116 So.2d 682 (1960), its wording was substantially revised by Acts 1976, No. 241, § 1, amended by Acts 1977, No. 326, § 1; Acts 1978, No. 731, § 1; and this Court has not had an occasion to rule on its validity. 1980Though the predecessor to R.S. 14:402 was held constitutional in State v. Morgan, 238 La. 829 , 116 So.2d 682 (1960), its wording was substantially revised by Acts 1976, No. 241, § 1, amended by Acts 1977, No. 326, § 1; Acts 1978, No. 731, § 1; and this Court has not had an occasion to rule on its validity. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Tripoli v. Gurry
neutral
1 sentence1968The exception was maintained in the District Court and, on appeal, we reversed that judgment and remanded the matter to the District Court for trial on the merits. 187 So.2d 540 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Cascio v. Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey
green
1 sentence1962This report was objected'to, however, this court had an occasion to rule on this exact question in Cascio v. Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, La.App., 32 So.2d 66 , in which the court held: “The evidence shows that the entries were made in the regular course of the business and in carrying out the duties of the employees who made the entries. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
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.