Wallace v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chem., 586 So. 2d 149 (La. 1991). · Go Syfert
Search
Wallace v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chem., 586 So. 2d 149 (La. 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Boudreaux v. Bollinger Shipyard (lactapp, 2016-06-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Boudreaux v. Bollinger Shipyard
La. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
Corp., 586 So.2d 149, 150 (La.1991) (“On the other hand, the court of appeal erred in taking judicial notice of the adjudicative fact that asbestosis and lung cancer in the same person are necessarily causally related.
discussed Cited "see" Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc. (2×)
La. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wallace v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, 586 So.2d 149 (La.1991).
cited Cited "see" Brunet v. Avondale Industries, Inc.
La. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See, Wallace v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, 586 So.2d 149 (La.1991).
cited Cited "see" Thomas v. Armstrong World Industries
La. Ct. App. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See, Wallace v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, 586 So.2d 149 (La.1991).
Twila WALLACE, et al.
v.
KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL CORPORATION, et al.
91-C-1317.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
Sep 27, 1991.
586 So. 2d 149
Per Curiam.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

[*150] Prior report: 578 So.2d 206.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs' application for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed. The trial judge erred in maintaining the exception of no cause of action. See Mayer v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., 444 So.2d 618 (La.1984). On the other hand, the court of appeal erred in taking judicial notice of the adjudicative fact that asbestosis and lung cancer in the same person are necessarily causally related. A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute. La.Code of Evidence, art. 201. Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.