 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Cunningham v. M&S Marine, Inc., NO. 2005-CA-0805,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a seaman's suit against a towing company for injuries sustained while working on a vessel, the trial court erred in entering a default judgment against the company under La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 1702 as the only evidence that the company was the owner was the worker's attestation in his affidavit, which amounted to inadmissible hearsay.
|
|||||
| Fuselier v. DOT & Dev., CA 05-681,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where trial judge did not evaluate or weigh uncontradicted evidence, there was no error in its grant of motion for JNOV and award of damages to wife whose husband and son burned to death in car accident; jury had only awarded specific damages and erred in not awarding general damages and the evidence depicted a very loving bond between the family.
|
|||||
| Galmiche v. State Farm Ins. Co., NO. 2005-CA-0394, CONSOLIDATED WITH: NO. 2005-CA-0395,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In plaintiffs' negligence suit, court did not err in finding causal link between any action or inaction of animal control department and ruination of specimen for purpose of testing for rabies after one plaintiff was bitten by dog because department breached its duty to collect dead dog and submit it for testing upon receiving notice from sheriff.
|
|||||
| Landry v. Furniture Ctr., WCA 05-643,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court was erroneous in finding employer and its insurer were not arbitrary and capricious in their denial of payment of medical expenses incurred due to work related injury; record contained sufficient information to prove both walking shoe and walker were medical expenses incurred as a result of an injury for which the employer was liable.
|
|||||
| Moreau v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe, CA 05-675,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court had not erred in finding town owed no duty regarding signalization at railroad crossing and in granting summary judgment to town; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 32:41(C) and 32:235 did not impose a duty on town to regulate crossings and, in absence of prior knowledge of a hazardous condition, town had no statutory duty to erect stop sign.
|
|||||
| Saunders v. Stafford, NO. 2005-CA-0205,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an elementary school principal's challenge to his reassignment due to allegations that he created a hostile work environment, a preliminary injunction against the school board pursuant to La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 3601 to immediately return the principal to his position was proper as the board failed to afford him his due process rights.
|
|||||
| Sibley v. Bremermann, NO. 2005-CA-0547,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a child custody case, appellant filed a notice of intent to appeal a judgment with no accompanying order within the sixty-day devolutive appeal delay, and a petition for appeal sixty-three days after the signing of judgment. The appeal was not properly taken pursuant to La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 2121.
|
|||||
| State v. Elzey, NO. 2005-KA-0562,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a murder trial, the trial court properly granted defendant's motion to quash the bill of information as the State intentionally caused defendant to move for a mistrial when it continued to question a witness about defendant's prior bad acts, despite the trial court's warnings not to do so.
|
|||||
| State v. Hawkins, NO. 2005-KA-0810,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to suppress should have been granted because her Fourth Amendment rights were violated; because there was an insufficient basis for arresting her for public intoxication since there was no showing of a danger presented or disturbing the peace, a search incident to arrest was unconstitutional.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
