Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Oubre v. Eslaih, 869 So. 2d 71.

15 citing documents.

The Upper Room Bible Church, Inc. D/B/A the Upperroom Bible Church, Pastor Herbert H. Rowe, Jr. and His … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
2/6/04), -77; Beaumont v. Exxon Corp., 2002-2322, p. 7 (La.App.
Succession of Betty Carolyn Leggett Wood La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
Stephen Medwick, Maxwell Perry, Brandon Russell, and Scott Peluso v. MADCON Corporation La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
Lovie Marshall, as curator obo Ezekiel Blakes, Sr., and Ezekiel Blakes, Jr. and Tashall Jones, individually v. Jean … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
Rayeanne Owens v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
2/6/04), Fryson v. Dupre Transp., Inc., 00-858, 00-859 (La.App.
Terrance Batiste v. Jose R. Gutierrez La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Batiste v. Gutierrez 944 So. 2d 840 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Oubre v. Eslaih, 03-1133, p. 10 (La.2/6/04), .
Brenda Bordelon v. Gregory D. Bordelon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Bordelon v. Bordelon 942 So. 2d 708 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Oubre v. Eslaih, 03-1133, pp. 8-9 (La.2/6/04), -77 .
Ardoin v. McKay 939 So. 2d 698 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
In making this argument, they rely on the principle of appellate review as stated in Oubre v. Eslaih, 03-1133 (La.2/6/04), .
David Bradley Ardoin v. Dr. Douglas McKay La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
LeBlanc v. City of Donaldsonville 897 So. 2d 104 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Oubre v. Eslaih, 03-1133, pp. 8-9 (La.2/6/04), .
Michael B. Sparks v. Mary Elizabeth Donovan La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
2/6/04), : in order to recover, a “plaintiff must prove that the conduct in question was a cause-in-fact of the resulting harm, the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, the requisite duty was breached by the defendant and the risk of harm was within the scope of protection afforded by the duty.” The fo
Sparks v. Donovan 884 So. 2d 1276 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Civ.Code art. 2315, courts are to employ a duty-risk analysis, as reiterated by the supreme court in its recent opinion in Oubre v. Eslaih, 03-1133, p. 9 (La.2/6/04), , 77: in order to recover, a “plaintiff must prove that the conduct in question was a cause-in-fact of the resulting harm, the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, the requisite duty was breached by the defendant and the risk of harm was within the scope of protection afforded by the duty.” The focus of the
Scarbrough v. OK Guard Dogs 879 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
4 Cir. 2/26/03) , , rev'd on other grounds, 03-1133 (La.2/6/04), , supports their position.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by