 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Lewis v. Smith, No. 40,590-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's finding defendant driver was favored with illuminated green arrow was based upon a reasonable interpretation of conflicting evidence and most significant for the review of the record, which presented two views of the evidence, was that the trial court found defendant driver to have "very high credibility and accuracy in all things."
|
|||||
| Lexington Ins. Co. v. M.W. Kellogg Constructors, Inc., 05-581,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While an insured had a duty under its policy, as the insurer's subrogor, to do nothing that would impair the insurer's rights as subrogee, the insured's conduct as the insurer's subrogor was not part of the "subject matter" of a federal release, even if some of that conduct occurred before the execution of the settlement agreement.
|
|||||
| Mizell v. Mizell, No. 40,601-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to factors under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 112, court found clear indication of wife's need and husband's ability to pay where husband earned over $ 186,000; however, trial court's ruling denying husband's request to terminate permanent spousal support payments was reversed, as support of major child could not be considered a living expense.
|
|||||
| Mosley v. Temple Baptist Church of Ruston La., Inc., No. 40,546-CW,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of summary judgment was reversed because there was no showing that the church breached a duty owed the wife to protect her against being knocked down by an unknown child who suddenly ran through the crowd at the church fall festival.
|
|||||
| Northeast Realty, L.L.C. v. Misty Bayou, L.L.C., No. 40,573-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where former members of LLC sought to intervene in action involving LLC, court did not err in granting exception of no cause of action; under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12:1301(A)(10), disputed property interests were property of LLC as separate legal entity, and, under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12:1320(C), members were not proper party.
|
|||||
| Premier Dodge, L.L.C. v. Perrilloux, NO. 2005-CA-0554,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When auto dealership attempted to recover proceeds from stolen car, ancillary venue applied because sheriff's office was a political subdivision under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13:5104, and venue was proper in Orleans Parish under current jurisprudence.
|
|||||
| Primus v. Touro Infirmary, NO. 2005-C-0662,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in denying doctor's exception of prescription; family members failed to allege in request for medical review panel on April 21, 2004, fact that they had not discovered malpractice earlier than April 21, 2003, and pursuant to amendment to La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 40:1299.47, burden was shifted to them to show claims had not prescribed.
|
|||||
| St. Bernard Optical Corp. v. Schoenberger, NO. 2005-CA-0548,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a suit brought by co-owners of an optical corporation against a doctor and an eye center for breach of their lease and trade practices violations, an exception of no right of action under La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 927 was properly granted as the co-owners' recovery depended on the corporate injury and was thus a derivative action.
|
|||||
| State v. Batton, No. 40,308-KA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant pled guilty to attempted possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, the trial court's imposition of a four-year sentence was within the appropriate range; it could not be appealed as excessive under La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 881.2(A)(2). Defendant's appeal was frivolous.
|
|||||
| State v. Boston, No. 40,368-KA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 38-year sentence for vehicular homicide as a second felony habitual offender was remanded for resentencing as it was illegally lenient; the trial court failed to order at least one year to be served without the benefit of parole, to assess a fine, and to order a substance abuse program, as required by La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:32.1.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
