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 1986–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Muscarello v. Ayogreen1 sentence1997See, e.g., Eubanks v. Hoffman, 96-0629, p. 5 (La.App. 4th Cir. 12/11/96), 685 So.2d 597, 599 . [12] The lack of a post-trial amending petition to formally add this claim is of no effect because Article 1154 expressly states that "failure to so amend does not affect the result of the trial of these issues." [13] Ms. Bryson does not argue that Ms. Gravolet could not assert this right on behalf of the community under Article 686 of the Code of Civil Procedure. [14] USF & G's argument concerning the untimeliness of this exception is without merit, as explained in footnote 10, supra. | 1 | 1 |
Eubanks v. Hoffmangreen1 sentence1997See, e.g., Eubanks v. Hoffman, 96-0629, p. 5 (La.App. 4th Cir. 12/11/96), 685 So.2d 597, 599 . [12] The lack of a post-trial amending petition to formally add this claim is of no effect because Article 1154 expressly states that "failure to so amend does not affect the result of the trial of these issues." [13] Ms. Bryson does not argue that Ms. Gravolet could not assert this right on behalf of the community under Article 686 of the Code of Civil Procedure. [14] USF & G's argument concerning the untimeliness of this exception is without merit, as explained in footnote 10, supra. | 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. McKnight
neutral
2 sentences2018In State v. McKnight , 16-310, p. 14 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/16/16), 2016 WL 4942398 (unpublished opinion), writ denied , 16-1769 (La. 6/16/17), 219 So.3d 340 , the first circuit stated the following regarding a defendant's relinquishment of his right to challenge his untimely jury trial waiver: As noted by the trial court, pursuant to both La. 2018In State v. McKnight , 16-310, p. 14 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/16/16), 2016 WL 4942398 (unpublished opinion), writ denied , 16-1769 (La. 6/16/17), 219 So.3d 340 , the first circuit stated the following regarding a defendant's relinquishment of his right to challenge his untimely jury trial waiver: As noted by the trial court, pursuant to both La. | 4 | 2018–2018 |
Johnson v. Odom
green
1 sentence1986Johnson v. Odom, 470 So.2d 988 (La.App. 1st Cir.1985), writ denied, 476 So.2d 355 (La.1985). [2] Because the untimeliness claim is valid, it is unnecessary to address assignment of error (C) which asserts error on the merits of the disciplinary action. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Johnson v. Odom
green
1 sentence1986Johnson v. Odom, 470 So.2d 988 (La.App. 1st Cir.1985), writ denied, 476 So.2d 355 (La.1985). [2] Because the untimeliness claim is valid, it is unnecessary to address assignment of error (C) which asserts error on the merits of the disciplinary action. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.