DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Scheib v. Ledet, 57 So. 2d 814.

13 citing documents.

  • Maryland Casualty Insurance v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Co. 228 So. 2d 88 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    195 ; Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., ; Flowers v. Indemnity Ins.
  • Stamper v. Allstate Insurance Co. 223 So. 2d 489 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    195 ; Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., ; Flowers v. Indemnity Ins.
  • Rhodus v. Allstate Insurance Company 192 So. 2d 226 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1967
    195 ; Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., ; Flowers v. Indemnity Ins.
  • Distinguished Hincks v. Edge 194 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
  • Michel v. Guillot 186 So. 2d 889 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
    The Lower Court, therefore, held that Wicker was not keeping a proper lookout and, based upon the holding in Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., , held that Wicker should have seen what he could have seen had he looked, and that his *893 failure to see the oncoming vehicale constituted negligence.
  • Suhre v. National Union Indemnity Co. of Penn. 145 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1962
    Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., .
  • Brooks v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 91 So. 2d 403 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    And again in Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., , our brethren of the Orleans Court observed: "It is a presumption of law, juris et de jure, that a person saw a thing that he should have seen had he looked, and that his failure to see what was there to be seen constitutes negligence."
  • American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. Massa 87 So. 2d 14 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
    For instance, in Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., , one of the vehicles was crossing St.
  • Vigilant Insurance Co. v. Lumbermen's Mutual Cas. Co. 85 So. 2d 87 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    Also Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., .
  • La Rocca v. Dabria 78 So. 2d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    It is obvious that “both [plaintiff and defendant were] guilty of joint and concurrent negligence proximately causing the accident, inasmuch as they * * * failed to maintain a proper lookout and to have their vehicles under control.” Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., 1952, .
  • New Hampshire Fire Ins. Co. v. Bush 68 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1953
    App.1949, ; Vidrine v. Fontenot, La.App.1950, ; Williams v. Ventura, La.App.1951, ; Scheib v. Ledet, La.App.1952, ; Tidewater Associated Oil Company v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Company, La.App.1952, .
  • Potomac Ins. v. City of Alexandria 66 So. 2d 22 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    Scheib v. Ledet, La.App., is another case cited.
  • Terrebonne v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co. 64 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    App., , in which we discussed a somewhat similar situation and said that possession of the right of way did not entirely relieve a driver of the necessity to exercise some caution.