Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Talbot v. Talbot, 864 So. 2d 590.

80 citing documents.

Perry M. Westbrook v. Katherine Broussard Weibel La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
―Clear and convincing‖ evidence is applied in civil cases only in exceptional circumstances, ―where there is thought to be special danger of deception, or where the court considers that the particular type of claim should be disfavored on policy grounds.‖ Talbot v. Talbot, 03-814 (La.12/12/03), ( and McCormick on Evidence, § 340(b), p. 798 (2d ed.1972)).
Westbrook v. Weibel 80 So. 3d 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
“Clear and convincing” evidence is applied in civil cases only in exceptional circumstances, “where there is thought to be special danger of deception, or where the court considers that the particular type of claim should be disfavored on policy grounds.” Talbot v. Talbot, 03-814 (La.12/12/03), ( and McCormick on Evidence, § 340(b), p. 798 (2d ed.1972)).
R. Alan Kite v. Jeffrey D. Kite La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Hoover v. Hoover 62 So. 3d 765 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814, p. 12 (La.12/12/03), .
Petrie v. Michetti 59 So. 3d 430 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Talbot v. Talbot, 2003-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
State ex rel. D.L.W. 56 So. 3d 1039 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Talbot v. Talbot, 2003-0814 (La.12/12/03), ; Pearce v. Medallion Const., 36,351 (La.App.
Crescent City Motors, L.L.C. v. Rafidi 54 So. 3d 1170 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
Iberia Medical Center v. Ward 53 So. 3d 421 La. 2010
Talbot v. Talbot, 2003-0814, p. 9-10 (La.12/12/03), .
Griffith v. Latiolais 48 So. 3d 1058 La. 2010
“Clear and convincing” evidence is applied in civil cases only in exceptional circumstances, “where there is thought to be special danger of deception, or where the court considers that the particular type of claim should be disfavored on policy grounds.” Talbot v. Talbot, 03-814 (La.12/12/03), ( and McCormick on 11REvidence, § 340(b), p. 798 (2d ed.1972)).
Shapiro v. Darmstadter 43 So. 3d 326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
“The ‘clear and convincing’ standard requires a party to prove the existence of a contested fact is highly probable, or much more probable than its non-existence.” Talbot v. Talbot, 2003-0814, pp. 9-10 (La.12/12/03), .
Midori Bhati v. Deo Bhati La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Our Louisiana Supreme Court, in Talbot v. Talbot, 00-814, p. 12 (La.12/12/03), found that these cases were superseded by statute, and stated the following: As a matter of public policy and in the interest of fairness, we find that the community presumption contained in [La.Civ.Code art.] 2340 is rebuttable by either spouse upon a showing by a preponderance of the
Bhati v. Bhati 32 So. 3d 1107 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Our Louisiana Supreme Court, in Talbot v. Talbot, 00-814, p. 12 (La.12/12/03), , found that these cases were superseded by statute, and stated the following: As a matter of public policy and in the interest of fairness, we find that the community presumption contained in [La.Civ.Code art.] 2340 is rebuttable by either spouse upon a showing by a preponderance of the evidence the separate *11
Bradley Griffith v. Resa Latiolais La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Griffith v. Latiolais 32 So. 3d 380 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
MoCormick [on EvidenCE § 339, at 421 (5th ed.1999) ]; Succession of Lyons, 452 So.2d at 1165 .” Talbot v. Talbot, 03-814, pp. 9-10 (La.12/12/03), .
Westcott v. Westcott 11 So. 3d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
The Louisiana Supreme Court in Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814, pp. 19-20 (La.12/12/03), , 604 explained the correct treatment of a life insurance policy with a value in a community property partition proceeding: Under Louisiana law, life insurance policies are treated as unique contracts governed by their own rules rather than by the Civil Code....
Hunter v. Morton's Seafood Restaurant & Catering 6 So. 3d 152 La. 2009
Talbot v. Talbot, 2003-0814, p. 7 (La.12/12/03); (“In civil cases, a party who has the burden of proof must prove the fact in issue by a preponderance of the evidence ...
Etter v. Johnston 966 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State v. Ourso 964 So. 2d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
See Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814, p. 9 (La.12/12/03)
Succession of Andrew M. Moore La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03)
Succession of Moore 946 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
Hanks v. Entergy Corp. 944 So. 2d 564 La. 2006
12/12/03), , quoting Cay v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 93-0887, p. 4 (La.
Richard G. Trahan v. Merry Lane Manley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
12/12/03), Ross v. Ross, 02-2984 (La.
Trahan v. Manley 933 So. 2d 251 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), ; Ross v. Ross, 02-2984 (La.10/21/03), .
Braud v. Braud 930 So. 2d 1023 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
Gates v. Honey 909 So. 2d 1025 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
Lanza v. Lanza 898 So. 2d 280 La. 2005
art. 2340; Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
In Re Succession of Culotta 900 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
[4] Talbot v. Talbot XXXX-XXXX (La.12/12/03), .
Soares v. Tidewater, Inc. 895 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
However, we note the sweeping language of the Supreme Court in Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814, pp. 9-10 (La.12/12/03), , favoring the "preponderance of the evidence" standard generally: In civil cases, a party who has the burden of proof must prove the fact in issue by a preponderance of the evidence, and not by some artificially created greater standard.
In Re Succession of Hebert 887 So. 2d 98 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814 (La.12/12/03), .
Noel v. Noel 884 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
However, the Supreme Court recently held in Talbot v. Talbot, 03-0814, p. 6 (La.12/12/03), , that the Article 2340 presumption of community is rebuttable upon a mere preponderance of the evidence, rejecting all prior jurisprudence requiring a stricter standard of proof.