Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes
La. Rev. Stat. § 1:1 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
LA-LEGlegis.la.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTES
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1990–2023 · leading case: Linde, B. v. Linde, S., 220 A.3d 1119 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
Linde, B. v. Linde, S., 220 A.3d 1119 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). “” 1 O'NEAL & THOMPSON'S OPPRESSION OF MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS & LLC MEMBERS § 1:1. As we have held: “an attempt by a group of majority shareholders to ‘freeze out’ minority shareholders for the purpose of continuing the enterprise for the benefit of the majority shareholders…”
Wooley v. Lucksinger, 14 So. 3d 311 (La. Ct. App. 2009). “R.S. 1:1 through 17. When construing a law or a constitutional provision, the word "shall" universally is considered to mean mandatory.”
Gregor v. Argenot Great Cent. Ins. Co., 851 So. 2d 959 (La. 2003). “R.S. 1:1 et seq. Louisiana Revised Statute 1:3 provides, in pertinent part, that "[w]ords and phrases shall be read with their context and shall be construed according to the common and approved usage of the language" and the "word `shall' is mandatory.”
Rabalais v. Nash, 952 So. 2d 653 (La. 2007). “32:24) have been enacted by the legislative branch and are found in LSA-R.S. 1:1 et seq. LSA-R.S. 1:3 provides, in pertinent part that, "[w]ords and phrases shall be read with their context and shall be construed according to the common and approved usage of the language.”
Cangelosi v. Our Lady of Lake Reg. Med. Ctr., 564 So. 2d 654 (La. 1990). “Speiser, Res Ipsa Loquitur § 1:1 (1972). The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur involves the simple matter of a plaintiff's using circumstantial evidence to meet the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Naquin v. Titan Indem. Co., 779 So. 2d 704 (La. 2001). “The phrase "to amend and reenact" is standard drafting language where an existing statute is being changed in some way, and, despite plaintiff's assertions, does not in itself carry any special weight.”
In re Harlan, 250 So. 3d 220 (La. 2018). “9, when a law is clear and unambiguous and its application does not lead to absurd consequences, the law shall be applied as written and no further interpretation may be made in search of the intent of the legislature.”
Snider v. Louisiana Med. Mut. Ins., 130 So. 3d 922 (La. 2013). “40 together with LSA-R.S. 1:1 ("This Act shall be known as the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950 and shall be cited as R.”
Ransome v. Ransome, 822 So. 2d 746 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “13:1401A can be interpreted to provide the family court with subject matter jurisdiction over garnishment proceedings against a third party.”
Wooley v. Lucksinger, 961 So. 2d 1228 (La. Ct. App. 2007). “R.S. 1:1 through 17. When construing a law or a constitutional provision, the word "shall" is universally considered to mean mandatory and the word "may" is universally considered to mean permissive (discretionary).”
Walden v. Walden, 835 So. 2d 513 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “R.S. 1:1 et seq. La. R.S. 1:3 provides as follows: Words and phrases shall be read with their context and shall be construed according to the common and approved usage of the language.”
Rainey v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc., 885 So. 2d 1193 (La. Ct. App. 2004). “R.S. 1:1 et seq. and Civil Code Article 9 et seq.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.