 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Earls v. McDowell, NO. 07-CA-17,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a suit by a mother and daughter against a driver and his insurer for personal injuries sustained in a car accident, the trial court erred in not awarding the full amount of medical expenses to the mother and daughter as the medical reports of their doctor were uncontroverted and proved their medical treatment was necessitated by the accident.
|
|||||
| George v. Paffen, NO. 06-CA-890,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Landlord was not liable for negligence under either La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 2315 or 2316 for dog bite injury by pit bull as there was no evidence she had actual knowledge of dog's vicious propensities; inter alia, she had seen the dog and witnessed it being gentle and neighbors' complaints were mostly about dogs barking and getting out of the yard.
|
|||||
| H2O Hair, Inc. v. Marquette, NO. 06-C-930 C/W, NO. 07-CA-18,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly enjoined a former employee from operating her business in a parish under a noncompetition agreement where it was uncontradicted that a substantial portion of her former employer's customers were residents of that parish and that solicitation of those customers was integral to the employer's hair salon business.
|
|||||
| In re Marks, NO. 2007-OB-0930,
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Laborde v. Roser's Cleaners, LLC, NO. 07-CA-78,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In customers' suit against a dry cleaning business to recover the value of a damaged dress, the business was liable under either the depository laws or under La. Civ. Code Ann. arts. 1756, 1994 as the business accepted the dress unconditionally, thereby implying that it would withstand the cleaning process, and the dress could no longer be worn.
|
|||||
| Nguyen v. Le, NO. 07-CA-81,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Wife had not rebutted presumption in favor of joint custody under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 132 and Post-Separation Family Violence Relief Act, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 9:361 et. seq., could not be raised for first time on appeal, but in abundance of caution, appellate court held she failed to prove required "history of perpetration of family violence."
|
|||||
| State v. Dauzart, NO. 07-KA-15,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inter alia, filing multiple bill was not unreasonable, vindictive, or prejudicial; prosecutor took steps necessary, i.e., filed multiple bill, to ensure defendant would receive what he considered a proper sentence, first multiple bill was filed very shortly (less than 4 weeks) after second conviction, and the enhanced sentence was not vindictive.
|
|||||
| State v. Parnell, NO. 07-KA-37,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress gun and marijuana found in a search incident to arrest because deputy had reasonable suspicion to question defendant, who was seen acting suspiciously in a high crime area, and upon seeing the outline of a weapon through defendant's pants, the deputy had probable cause to arrest him.
|
|||||
| State v. Ragas, NO. 07-KA-3,
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIFTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of armed robbery under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:64, because defendant admitted in his statement to the police that he left the gun in the restaurant after the robbery, and defendant clearly created an "atmosphere of intimidation."
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
