La. Rev. Stat. § 32:295
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
LA-LEGlegis.la.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§295. Child passenger restraint system
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1961–2025 · leading case: Lam Ex Rel Lam v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins
Lam Ex Rel Lam v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins (2006)
“LSA-R.S. 32:295(F) states "[i]n no event shall failure to wear a child passenger seat safety seat be considered as comparative negligence, nor shall such failure be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action with regard to negligence, nor shall such failure be…”
Lam Ex Rel. Lam v. State Farm Auto. Ins. (2005)
“They relied on the plain language of LSA-R.S. 32:295(F), which states "[i]n no event shall failure to wear a child passenger safety seat system be considered as comparative negligence, nor shall such failure be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action with regard…”
Hammer v. City of Lafayette (1987)
“Although our legislature has since passed LSA-R.S. 32:295, requiring a child passenger restraint system for children under the age of five years, and LSA-R.”
Lawrence v. Core (1961)
“With reference to the lights required on such vehicles, LSA-R.S. 32:295 provides as follows: "Bicycles; front and rear lamps "Every bicycle shall be equipped with a lighted lamp on its front, visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of at least three hundred…”
Fils v. Allstate Insurance Co. (2015)
“…across the carrier. Following the accident, Calais was issued a citation for a child restraint violation. See LSA-R.S. 32:295. . Thereafter, by order dated July 3, 2012, the trial court approved the creation of the "Geneva Marie Fils Trust” and made the Trust a…”
Salaiman v. Louisiana Casino Cruises, Inc. (2002)
“R.S. 32:295, which requires that children under the age of thirteen be properly secured when riding in a vehicle, but which states that the failure to do so shall not "be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action with regard to negligence," provides tort immunity…”
Jeremy Faciane and Faith Faciane Versus Morteza Shamsnia, M.D., United Educators' Insurance, a Reciprocal Risk Retention (2025)
“R.S. 32:295(F), defendant should be precluded from offering testimony or any evidence of Jeremy Faciane not being placed in a booster seat at the time of the subject accident.”
Brown v. Landry (1989)
“LSA-R.S. 32:295 and 295.1 are the state’s statutes dealing with seat belts.”
State v. Edwards (1989)
“32:64, speeding, and LSA-R.S. 32:295, failing to secure a child in an automobile seat.”
— La. Rev. Stat. § 32:295(F) — 3 cases
Lam Ex Rel Lam v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins (2006)
“LSA-R.S. 32:295(F) states "[i]n no event shall failure to wear a child passenger seat safety seat be considered as comparative negligence, nor shall such failure be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action with regard to negligence, nor shall such failure be…”
Lam Ex Rel. Lam v. State Farm Auto. Ins. (2005)
“They relied on the plain language of LSA-R.S. 32:295(F), which states "[i]n no event shall failure to wear a child passenger safety seat system be considered as comparative negligence, nor shall such failure be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil action with regard…”
Jeremy Faciane and Faith Faciane Versus Morteza Shamsnia, M.D., United Educators' Insurance, a Reciprocal Risk Retention (2025)
“R.S. 32:295(F), defendant should be precluded from offering testimony or any evidence of Jeremy Faciane not being placed in a booster seat at the time of the subject accident.”
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.