DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 851 So. 2d 1006.

95 citing documents.

  • Clement v. City of Lake Charles 52 So. 3d 1054 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Access Water Rights Ass’n, 02-2660 (La.6/27/03), ; Ark-La.
  • Petchak v. Bossier Parish Police Jury 55 So. 3d 840 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 02-2660 (La.6/27/03), ; St.
  • Savage v. State Farm Mutual Insurance 33 So. 3d 919 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    of review is that “reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the court of appeal is convinced that had it been the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc., 08-1163 (La.5/22/09), ; Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 02-2660 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc. 16 So. 3d 1065 La. 2009
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 2002-2660 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Hernandez v. BARATARIA PARK, LLC 13 So. 3d 200 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2009
    nce offered in support of the motion for summary judgment was sufficient to establish an implied dedication prior to plaintiffs’ hnpurchase of the land, by establishing the combination of “an unequivocally manifested intent to dedicate on the part of the owner and an equally clear intent to accept on the part of the public.” Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 2002-2660, p. 6 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Nelson v. Nelson 985 So. 2d 1285 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 2002-2660, p. 9, (La.6/27/03), .
  • Melancon Equipment, Inc. v. National Rental Co., Ltd. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • Melancon Equipment v. National Rental Co. 978 So. 2d 1053 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Cencac v. Public Access Water Rights Association, 02-2660, p. 9 (La.6/27/03), ( ).
  • Charles McKelvey, Jr. v. City of Dequincy La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
  • McKelvey v. City of Dequincy 970 So. 2d 682 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Association, 02-2660, p. 9 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Hww Enterprises, Inc. D/B/A Worldwide Professional Services v. Environmental Treatment Team, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    That standard was recently reviewed by our supreme court in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), : In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court's finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wro
  • Hww Enterprises v. Environmental Treatment 952 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    That standard was recently reviewed by our supreme court in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , 1023: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court's finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wrong in light of the record reviewed in its entirety.
  • Morgan v. Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development 951 So. 2d 408 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Jenkins v. Fanguy 946 So. 2d 201 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 2002-2660 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Alicia Lester v. Dr. Robert Levy La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    That standard was recently reviewed by our supreme court in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), : In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court’s finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wro
  • Rachal v. Luzader 927 So. 2d 1286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    That standard was recently reviewed by our supreme court in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , 1023: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error- *1288 clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court’s finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wrong in light of the record reviewed in its entirety.
  • JOHN CHERBONNIER CONST. v. Big Easy Roofing 926 So. 2d 587 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    [4] 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Bujol v. Entergy Services, Inc. 922 So. 2d 1113 La. 2006
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 2002-2660 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Aura E. Miller v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    3 Cir. 12/10/03), -37: Recently, in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), our supreme court reviewed the law applicable to the appellate review of cases involving factual determinations at the trial level: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wro
  • Miller v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. 923 So. 2d 886 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    3 Cir. 12/10/03), , 736-37: Recently, in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , our supreme court reviewed the law applicable to the appellate review of cases involving factual determinations at the trial level: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial c
  • Phipps v. Allstate Ins. Co. 924 So. 2d 1081 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 02-2660 (La.6/27/03)
  • John H. Pucheu v. Maxine Guidry Pucheu La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • D'Angelo v. D'Angelo 901 So. 2d 607 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Monroe v. Baron One, LLC 902 So. 2d 529 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    [2] 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Cross v. The Louisiana Coca-Cola Bottling Co. 899 So. 2d 621 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 2002-2660 (La.6/27/03)
  • Bradford v. South Louisiana Sugars Cooperative, Inc. 894 So. 2d 532 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), .
  • Driscoll v. Stucker 893 So. 2d 32 La. 2005
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 2002-2660 (La.6/27/03), .
  • William Anderson, Sr., Et Ux. v. Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 2002-2660, p. 9, (La.6/27/03)
  • Raburn & Associates v. Burgundy Oaks L.L.C. 875 So. 2d 119 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    Hall v. Folger Coffee Co., 2003-1734 (La.04/14/2004), ; Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 2002-2660 (La.06/27/03), .
  • Walker Lands, Inc. v. E. CARROLL POLICE JURY 871 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    [14] For example, see Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Association, 02-2660 (La.6/27/03), ; Buckskin Hunting Club, supra .
  • Hall v. Folger Coffee Co. 874 So. 2d 90 La. 2004
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 2002-2660, p. 9, (La.6/27/03), .
  • American Interstate Insurance Co. v. Forsythe 870 So. 2d 498 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass’n, 2002-2660 (La.06/27/03), .
  • Celia Ann Marks v. Ohmeda, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    Recently, in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), our supreme court reviewed the law applicable to the appellate review of cases involving factual determinations at the trial level: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wro
  • Marks v. Ohmeda, Inc. 871 So. 2d 1148 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    Recently, in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , our supreme court reviewed the law applicable to the appellate review of cases involving factual determinations at the trial level: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest errorclearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial co
  • Buckskin Hunting Club v. Buddy Bayard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    6/27/03), wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court recently stated: “Although [a] canal is navigable, this fact alone does not render it public.” Neither do we conclude that the trial court was required to credit the defendants’ testimony regarding their opinion as to the diversion of natural waterways through the constru
  • Buckskin Hunting Club v. Bayard 868 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    See also Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 02-2660, p. 10 (La.6/27/03), , wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court recently stated: "Although [a] canal is navigable, this fact alone does not render it public."
  • Ollie Mae Pecot v. Calcasieu-Cameron Hospital Service District, Etc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    6/27/03), : In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court's finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wrong in light of the record re
  • Pecot v. Calcasieu-Cameron Hospital Service District 867 So. 2d 56 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    That standard was recently reviewed by our supreme court in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , 1023: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court’s finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wrong in light of the record reviewed in its entirety.
  • Pecot v. CALCASIEU-CAMERON HOSP. SER. DIST. 867 So. 2d 56 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    That standard was recently reviewed by our supreme court in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , 1023: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a trial court's finding of fact unless those findings are clearly wrong in light of the record reviewed in its entirety.
  • Jessica Broussard v. Reliance Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    6/27/03), our supreme court reviewed the law applicable to the appellate review of cases involving factual determinations at the trial level: In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which
  • Broussard v. Premiere, Inc. 861 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    Recently, in Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 02-2660, pp. 9-10 (La.6/27/03), , our supreme court reviewed the law applicable to the appellate review of cases involving factual determinations at the trial level: *737 In civil cases, the appropriate standard for appellate review of factual determinations is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard which precludes the setting aside of a tr
  • Cheairs v. State Ex Rel. DOTD 861 So. 2d 536 La. 2003
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Ass'n, 2002-2660, p. 9, (La.6/27/03), .
  • GREATER NEW ORLEANS EXPRESSWAY v. Olivier 860 So. 2d 22 La. 2003
    Becker v. Dean, 03-2493, p. 4 (La.9/18/03), , 875 n. 5, Weimer, J., dissenting; Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Association, 02-2660, p. 9 (La.6/27/03), , 1023 n. 6, Weimer, J., dissenting in part.
  • Becker v. Dean 854 So. 2d 864 La. 2003
    See Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Association, 02-2660 (La.6/27/03), , Weimer, J. dissenting in part.
  • Ramirez v. Transit Management of Southeast Louisiana, Inc. 855 So. 2d 379 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Cenac v. Public Access Water Rights Assn., 2002-2660 (La.6/27/03)