Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ransome v. Ransome, 822 So. 2d 746.

34 citing documents.

Teresa Wallner Caballero v. David Fernando Caballero 198 So. 3d 1163 La. 2016
Louisiana Pigment Company, Lp v. Air Liquide America Corp., Lp La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Louisiana Pigment Co. v. Air Liquide America, L.P. 149 So. 3d 997 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Rodriguez v. Walters 136 So. 3d 871 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
1 Cir. 6/21/02), , explaining: Where it is possible to do so, it is the duty of the courts in the interpretation of laws to adopt a construction of the provision in question which harmonizes and reconciles it with other provisions.
Donnie Chesne v. Cappaert Manufactured Housing, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Chesne v. Cappaert Manufactured Housing, Inc. 111 So. 3d 526 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Hagen v. Hagen 110 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Thompson Tree & Spraying Service, Inc. v. White-Spunner Construction, Inc. 68 So. 3d 1142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center,(edith Hilborn) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center, (Vicky Lacour) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center, (David Nardin) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center, (Bridget Huie) v. Payless Shoesource, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center (Travis Villemarette) v. Gilchrist Construction Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center (Tammy Tyler) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center (Patricia Harmson) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center (Dwight Tennie) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center (Carmen Lacour) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Central La. Ambulatory Surgical Center (Forrest Robinson) v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
West Cameron Port, Harbor and Terminal District v. Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal Dist. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
West Cameron Port v. Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal Dist. 38 So. 3d 577 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Martin v. SAFEWAY INSURANCE CO. OF LOUISIANA 26 So. 3d 777 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
App. 1 Cir. 04/21/02), , 754 appears the following: Pursuant to the standard rules for statutory construction (1) it is presumed that every provision of law was intended to serve some useful purpose; (2) it is not presumed that the lawmaker intended for any part of a law to be meaningless; (3) the lawmaker is presumed to have enacted the la
Harrah's Bossier City Investment Co. v. Bridges 22 So. 3d 921 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Margie F. Martin v. Safeway Insurance co.of Louisiana La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
1 Cir. 04/21/02), appears the following: Pursuant to the standard rules for statutory construction (1) it is presumed that every provision of law was intended to serve some useful purpose; (2) it is not presumed that the lawmaker intended for any part of a la
Wooley v. Lucksinger 14 So. 3d 311 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Welborn v. 19TH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT 961 So. 2d 394 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Spinosa v. Spinosa 934 So. 2d 35 La. 2006
Munsch v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. 928 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
1 Cir. 04/21/02), , 754 appears the following: Pursuant to the standard rules for statutory construction (1) it is presumed that every provision of law was intended to serve some useful purpose; (2) it is not presumed that the lawmaker intended for any part of a law to be meaningless; (3) the lawmaker is presumed to have enacted the la
P. Charles Calahan v. Scottsdale Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
P. Charles Calahan, Aplc v. Scottsdale Ins. 903 So. 2d 1251 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Rainey v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc. 885 So. 2d 1193 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
1 Cir. 04/21/02), , 754 appears the following: Pursuant to the standard rules for statutory construction (1) it is presumed that every provision of law was intended to serve some useful purpose; (2) it is not presumed that the lawmaker intended for any part of a law to be meaningless; (3) the lawmaker is presumed to have enacted the la
Covington Pontiac-Buick-GMC Trucks, Inc. v. AAA Sewer & Water Fabrication & Service, LLC 873 So. 2d 56 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Times Picayune Pub. Corp. v. BD. OF SUP'RS 845 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Held v. Aubert 845 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 6/21/02) , as follows: *638 When a law or ordinance is clear and free from all ambiguity, it must be given effect as written.
Ransome v. Ransome 834 So. 2d 1223 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002