 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Grillette v. Alliance Compressors, 05-982,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employee was not entitled to supplemental earnings benefits under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 23:1221. Employee failed to meet her burden of proof by virtue of stipulation that she was terminated for cause; the fact that job was no longer available due to employee's "for cause termination" was no different from refusing to accept job in the first place.
|
|||||
| Hanks v. Entergy Corp., NO. 40,486-CA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding against a utility company in an owner and an insured's action for damages was improper where their case did not exclude the probable hypothesis that the location of the lightning was within the area near the pole where the Act of God force overwhelmed the ability of the equipment to ground the massive charge and prevent the fire.
|
|||||
| Hatsfelt v. Hatsfelt, 05-0947,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where husband continued to operate family restaurant after wife filed for divorce, as co-owner in possession and control of former community property, he was burdened with duty to prudently preserve and manage restaurant operation. Given his totally inconsistent records as to debts incurred, court erred in ordering wife to make equalizing payment.
|
|||||
| Hebert v. Conner-Monceaux Gen. Contrs., WCA 05-760,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of workers' compensation benefits was affirmed because there was no manifest error in finding that the claimant and his wife violated La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 23:1208 by continuing to accept attendant care benefits and providing the health care providers with information that the claimant was not able to do anything for himself.
|
|||||
| Hitchcock v. Heritage Manor Nursing Home, 05-1010,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In light of the contradictory evidence and WCJ's credibility evaluation with regard to the claimant's motive or intent, the appellate court found that summary judgment was not appropriate as a material issue of fact remained as to whether the claimant made willful misrepresentations to obtain benefits in violation of La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 23:1208.
|
|||||
| In re Kuntz , NO. 2005-CA-0172,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Oil and gas companies were required to produce certain documents to a former wife, despite the fact that they were trade secrets under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 51:1431(4)(a)(b), because the information was relevant and necessary to the wife's claim that she was not receiving money she was entitled to under an agreement dividing property.
|
|||||
| Ironwood Res., Ltd. v. Baby Oil, Inc., CW 05-467, consolidated with 05-910,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a suit by owners of undivided working interests in certain oil, gas, and mineral leases against the operators of the contract area, because the owners' claims arose out of the parties' operating agreement, a contract affecting oil, gas, and mineral leases, their claims were immovable in nature and La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 80 governed venue.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. Barron, 05-975,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In personal injury action, evidence clearly showed defendant had lived with his new wife in her home in Grant Parish since well before accident. Same was his principal residence and his habitual residence. Same was the principal establishment in which he made his habitual residence. Thus, venue was not proper in other parish where action was filed.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. Christus Health Cent. La., 05-0983,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: WCJ did not err in awarding workers' compensation medical benefits, penalties, and attorney fees; employee did not forfeit benefits pursuant to La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 23:1208 where WCJ was convinced that she did not wilfully and intentionally misrepresent mileage trips. Employee presented medical evidence supporting possibility of causal connection.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
