 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Chaisson v. Avondale Indus., NO. 2005-CA-1511,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an asbestos exposure case, court did not create a categorical rule regarding the company's duty regarding asbestos when it applied a general duty of a company with knowledge of asbestos and OSHA standards to the facts of the case to find that the company owed a duty to guard a wife against exposure from laundering asbestos contaminated clothing.
|
|||||
| Doe v. A.B., 06-1226,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding that an adoption could not go forward without the natural father's consent was improper under La. Child. Code Ann. arts. 1138 and 1103(5) because there was no evidence that he made any attempts to manifest any substantial commitment. He failed to provide financial support and failed to prove he had the ability to care for the baby.
|
|||||
| Foshee v. La. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co., No. 41,842-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in finding float driver, a member of a non-profit that was sponsoring a parade, was immune from liability for personal injury suit under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 9:2796 because, inter alia, statute did not require the non-profit organization sponsor an additional or broader celebration or "festival" of which the parade was a part.
|
|||||
| Grant v. Am. Sugar Ref., Inc., NO. 2006-CA-1180,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Grant of summary judgment in favor of seller of asbestos-containing insulation in son's action alleging that he contracted a disease from his father's work clothes was improper because trial court erroneously made credibility determination regarding content of an expert's affidavit based upon his absence from the work site at the time of exposure.
|
|||||
| Graves v. Riverwood Int'l Corp., No. 41,810-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Paper mill worker's tort cause of action against his former employer, in which he alleged his malignant pleural mesothelioma was caused by excessive exposure to asbestos while working at the paper mill prior to 1952, vested prior to the enactment of La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 23:1031.1 and therefore, workers' compensation was not his exclusive remedy.
|
|||||
| Hennessey Constr. Corp. v. Halpern, NO. 2006-CA-1099,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment in favor of a contractor's insurer was error in a building owner's reconventional demand as the owner's prescribed claims were incidental to and directly connected with the obligation the contractor sought to enforce and thus could have been used as a defense to the contractor's main demand under La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 424.
|
|||||
| II Fire Records, L.L.C. v. Clouden, NO. 2006-CA-0763,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant did not commit conversion, as what was involved was execution of contract by third party in favor of defendant in derogation of plaintiff's contract rights. Defendant acted in reasonably prudent business manner and conformity with industry standards in attempting to ascertain whether other party was contractually obligated to plaintiff.
|
|||||
| La. Safety Ass'n of Timbermen Self Insurers Fund v. Courtney Constr. Co. of Alexandria, Inc., No. 41,564-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lake D'Arbonne Props., L.L.C. v. Digco Util. Constr., Inc., No. 41,671-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In construction of subdivision, developer alleged that energy company's actions caused roadbed's failure. Trial court did not clearly err in finding energy company solely at fault because it was beyond coincidence that roadbed failed in same areas where utility trench was dug. Construction company was not liable under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 9:2771.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
