Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, 55 So. 2d 641.

13 citing documents.

Reilly v. Dynamic Exploration, Inc. 558 So. 2d 1249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
See also Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp., , 644 (La.App.)
Thomas v. Jacobs 459 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
345 (La.App.Orleans 1939); Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation
Enclarde v. Roach 397 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
The cases cited by plaintiffs in support of this contention dealt with situations where the statement was given to the opposing party's insurance company (Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, [La.App.
April v. Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Texas 273 So. 2d 50 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
In the case of Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, this court succinctly stated: "* * * There is no room for doubt that a court has the right to consider a statement of a litigant made after an accident, despite the fact that the statement is retracted in his sworn testimony.
Dowling v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York 168 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
Robinson v. Dupuy Storage & Forwarding Corp. 137 So. 2d 474 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
en court, is not accepted by the courts as conclusively impeaching his testimony, and that the courts will look to the facts and circumstances and the evidence in each particular case to determine whether or not greater weight and credence will be given to the written statement, or the testimony given in open court.” See, also, Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, Ltd., La.App., ; Bartholomew v. Impastato, La.
Elliott v. Lynch 113 So. 2d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
The observation made by Judge McBride of the Orleans Court of Appeal in Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, Ltd., La.App., , to the effect that “It is almost impossible for one to calculate with any degree of precision the behavior of vehicles after a collision”, appears very appropriate.
Mickens v. American Automobile Ins. 67 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
In Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp., Ltd., La.App., , the court said: “There is no room for doubt that a court has the right to consider a statement of a litigant made after an accident, despite the fact that the statement is retracted in his sworn testimony.
Porter v. De Boisblanc 64 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
2d 726 ; Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, La.App., .
Patrick v. T. Smith & Sons, Inc. 56 So. 2d 190 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
& Guarantee Co., La.App., .
Amant v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. 55 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
The cause of action arose out of the same automobile accident considered in the case of Galiano v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, Ltd., La.App., .
Buquet v. St. Amant 55 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
n solido, for $445.00, representing damage to plaintiff’s automobile; plaintiff also sought to recover, for the use and benefit of his minor son, Henry Buquet, the sum of $5,536.59, for personal injuries and the loss of earnings sustained by the minor, all as a result of the same automobile accident discussed by us in the case of Galiano v. The Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, La.App., .
Emmco Ins. Co. v. Ocean Accident & Guaranty Corp. 55 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Amant, which was involved in the accident discussed in the case of Galiano v. The Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation, Ltd., La.App., .