 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Rayford v. AMTRAK, NO. 2005-C-1273,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, April 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a railroad engineer's and conductor's suit against their employer for injuries sustained in a train collision, the trial court properly denied the employer's exception of nonjoinder of the Parish in which the collision occurred as the employer was a solidary obligor under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1794.
|
|||||
| Lemmons v. Ga. Pac. Corp., No. 42,142-WCA,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, SECOND CIRCUIT, April 18, 2007, Judgment Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Office of Workers' Compensation (OWC) judgment deciding only part of the benefit claims did not specifically state that it was a partial judgment and it did not include any language under La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 1915 certifying it as suitable for immediate appeal, the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction and the appeal was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Mixon v. Iberia Surgical, L.L.C., 06-878,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, April 18, 2007, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inter alia, Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, La. Rev. Stat, Ann. § 51:1401 et seq., did not provide a remedy for doctor who was terminated from medical group; he was released for legitimate business reasons and was properly compensated in accordance with provisions of the operating agreement, which he had helped draft.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. S.L.W., NO. 2006-CA-1560,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's consideration of evidence regarding visitation dates and gifts given to the children after the filing date of the termination petition did not violate La. Child. Code Ann. art. 1015(4)(b)-(c) as abandonment was not an issue; thus, the statutory provisions did not apply to the mother's rehabilitation efforts.
|
|||||
| State v. Baker, 06-1218,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, April 18, 2007, Opinion Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While there were no fingerprints found on the weapons, taped conversations corroborated testimony of two fact witnesses who testified that defendant possessed firearms. Thus, evidence was sufficient to convict him of being a felon in possession of a firearm, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:95.1, as he had actual or constructive possession or over firearm.
|
|||||
| State v. Lee, 06-941,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT, April 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for possession of cocaine and marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 40:967(A)(1) and 40:966(A)(1) were appropriate due to the amount and packaging of the drugs and the fact that defendant admitted during questioning that the drugs were his.
|
|||||
| Succession of Feitel, NO. 2005-CA-1482,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FOURTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a decedent's olographic notarized codicil left antique bedroom furniture to a doctor, the doctor's motion to traverse was properly denied under La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 3137 because there was sufficient evidence to support the factual finding that a family partnership, rather than the decedent, owned the furniture.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
