DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Interiano v. Fernando Pastrana Const., 887 So. 2d 547.

13 citing documents.

  • Sonic Ambassador v. Richard 270 So. 3d 847 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    5 Cir. 10/26/04) , ] court reasoned, there is no requirement in La.Rev.Stat.
  • Sonic of Ambassador v. Damon Richard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), ] court reasoned, there is no requirement in La.Rev.Stat.
  • Baker v. Harrah's 190 So. 3d 379 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    5 Cir. 10/26/04) , ] court reasoned, there is no requirement in La.Rev.Stat.
  • Ellis Hargrave v. Elier Diaz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
  • Allen v. Affordable Home Furnishings 149 So. 3d 836 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    5 Cir. 10/26/04) , ] court reasoned, there is no requirement in La.Rev.Stat.
  • Hargrave v. State 100 So. 3d 786 La. 2012
    5 Cir. 10/26/04) , , the Fifth Circuit found no error in the OWC hearing officer’s ruling ordering the claimant to cooperate in voca *792 tional rehabilitation services but declining to require the counselor to agree to abide by the Crain Brothers conditions before commencing to provide such services.
  • Ellis Hargrave v. State of Louisiana La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), we “did not hold that the conditions set forth by the claimant‟s counsel were mandatory in every case or that they should be „deemed necessary by 3 the hearing officer‟ in every situation.” We simply found “that La.R.S.
  • Hargrave v. State 80 So. 3d 1198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), , we “did not hold that the conditions set forth by the claimant’s counsel were mandatory in every case or that they should be ‘deemed necessary by 14the hearing officer’ in every situation.” We simply found “that La.R.S.
  • Anderson v. Eckerd Corp. 939 So. 2d 386 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
  • Rhonda A. Luquette v. Clayborn Self D/B/A Blockbuster La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), we “did not hold that the conditions set forth by the claimant’s counsel were mandatory in every case or that they should be ‘deemed necessary by the hearing officer’ in every situation.” We simply found “that La.R.S.
  • Luquette v. Clayborn Self 929 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), , we “did not hold that the conditions set forth by the claimant’s counsel were mandatory in every case or that they should be ‘deemed necessary by the hearing officer’ in every situation.” We simply found “that La.R.S.
  • Linda Moody v. Abrom Kaplan Memorial Hospital La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), we “did not hold that the conditions set forth by the claimant’s counsel were mandatory in every case or that they should be ‘deemed necessary by the hearing officer’ in every situation.” We simply found “that La.
  • Moody v. Abrom Kaplan Memorial Hospital 918 So. 2d 1203 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    5 Cir. 10/26/04), , we “did not hold that the conditions set forth by the claimant’s counsel were mandatory in every case or that they should be ‘deemed necessary by the hearing officer’ in every situation.” We simply found “that La.