 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| All Seasons Constr., Inc. v. Mansfield Hous. Auth., No. 40,490-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a contractor's suit against the housing authority to recover money withheld as liquidated damaged under the parties' construction contract, the trial court properly ruled in favor of the contractor as the evidence showed that the contractor achieved substantial completion of the project by the contract date.
|
|||||
| Allstate Ins. Co. v. Doyle Giddings, Inc., No. 40,496-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting exception of prescription to homeowners and their insurer in subrogation action brought by renter's insurer; inter alia, claim asserted in amending petitions adding owners and their insurer as defendants arose out of same transaction or occurrence in original pleading and it was clear owners had prior notice of suit.
|
|||||
| Cash Point Plantation Equestrian Ctr., Inc. v. Shelton, No. 40,647-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although equestrian center made some showing that the former landowner's retained right-of-way was the shortest route to the public road, same was not sufficient to justify burdening the former landowner's entire estate with a right of passage. Per La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 689 and 692, and parties own earlier stipulation, and new road was required.
|
|||||
| Cook v. Cook, No. 40,572-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court's attempt to control individual's alleged harmful influence over children and imposition on mother of automatic change in custody to father if she allowed individual to associate with children in future should not have taken form of "automatic change" with no hearing on best interests of children under La. Civ. Code Ann. arts. 131 and 134.
|
|||||
| In re Giordano, NO. 05-OB-2370,
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Giordano, NO. 05-OB-0818,
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Hobgood, NO. 06-B-0140,
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In the Interest of S.L.G., No. 40,858-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding of contempt against the parents was improper pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Law, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13:1700 et seq., because the Louisiana trial court should have given the Texas judgment full faith and credit as required by U.S. Const. art. IV, § 1. Also, the parents were reasonable in not permitting visitation.
|
|||||
| Jordan v. Willis-Knighton Med. Ctr., No. 40,564-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in denying patient compensation fund's exceptions challenging husband's amended and supplemental petition filed after fund had appealed a final judgment; substantive issues asserted in the new filing were new claims and did not fit within list in La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 2088 of matters over which trial court retained jurisdiction.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
