DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., 46 So. 2d 525.

16 citing documents.

  • LeJeune v. Union Pacific RR 712 So. 2d 491 La. 1998
  • Thomas v. Missouri Pacific RR Co. 451 So. 2d 1152 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
  • Theriot v. Texas and New Orleans Railroad Co. 220 So. 2d 563 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
    Bordenave v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ."
  • Scott v. Louisiana Midland Railway Co. 204 So. 2d 597 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    Cir. 1950); Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., (La.App.
  • Sule v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company 181 So. 2d 280 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
    2d 47 ; Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., La.App., .
  • Russ v. Indiana Lumbermen's Mutual Insurance 170 So. 2d 171 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    See Soileau v. New Hampshire Insurance Company, La.App., ; Barrett v. Houston Fire and Casualty Company, La.App., ; Bechtel v. Oriol, La.App., ; Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., La.App., ; Fontenot v. Freudenstein, La.App., 199 So.
  • Parks v. Texas Pacific-Missouri Pacific Terminal R. 152 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1963
    Co., La.App., ; Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., La.App., ; Matthews v. New Orleans Terminal Co., La.App., .
  • Rico v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad 140 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    Wright v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Bordenave v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Levy v. New Orleans & N. E. Ry.
  • Oliver v. Illinois Central Railroad Company 135 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
  • Klaus v. Southern Railway Co. 107 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    In Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., La.App., , 530 we said: “ * * * The rule is well established that negative testimony of this sort will not prevail against positive testimony to the contrary.
  • Hartford Fire Ins. v. Texas & N. O. R. 70 So. 2d 767 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    In Bordenave v. Texas and New Orleans Railroad Company, 1950, , we observed: “* * * where the crewmen in charge of a train see an automobile approaching the tracks on-which the train is operating, they are not negligent in assuming that it will stop unless such assumption .
  • Williamson v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. 66 So. 2d 621 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    Two of the latest pronounce *624 ments of this doctrine are found in Hanks v. Arkansas & L. M. Railway Co., La.App., ; Bordenave v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., .
  • Leger v. Texas & P. R. Co. 67 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    App., ; Levy v. New Orleans & N. E. Ry.
  • Hanks v. Arkansas & Louisiana Missouri Ry. Co. 62 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    Bordenave v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., .
  • Bailes v. Texas & P. Ry. Co. 59 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    Bordenave v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Wright v. Texas & N. O. Railway Co., La.App., .
  • Bechtel v. Oriol 52 So. 2d 589 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
    We said: “Often, in crossing a -street, a pedestrian, seeing a car approaching and about to pass in front of' him, continues on his course until within a few feet of the path of the car and then stops to allow it to go by.” This doctrine was further discussed by us in Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co., La.App., .