Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hutchinson v. KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, NO. 5747, 866 So. 2d 228.

195 citing documents.

  • Trautmann v. Fitzgerald 113 So. 3d 429 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Dauzat v. Cumest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), ; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University, 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96), .
  • Stewart Title of Louisiana v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. 112 So. 3d 949 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Hutchison v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 8 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Billie Sam v. State of Louisiana, Dept. of Transportation & Development La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    2/20/04), Hardy v. Bowie, 98–2821, (La.
  • Babino v. Jefferson Transit 110 So. 3d 1123 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Mansoor v. Jazz Casino Co. 98 So. 3d 795 La. 2012
    Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), ; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University, 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96), .
  • Sheffie v. Wal-Mart Louisiana, LLC 92 So. 3d 625 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See Newsome v. Homer Memorial Medical Center, 10-0564 (La.4/9/10), -03 (per curiam) (holding that depositions and affidavits considered must be “on file” prior to the hearing on the motion for summary judgment); Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), (holding that “[ajffidavits in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment must be filed into evidence at the hearing on the motion or filed into the record in order for the affidavits to be part o
  • Kathy A. Darbonne, Et Ux. v. Bertrand Investments, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • Bickham v. Lammico 90 So. 3d 467 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    art. 966; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 5 (La.2/20/04), ; Harris v. Sternberg, 01-1827, p. 4 (La.App.
  • Bates v. Louisiana National Guard Armory 86 So. 3d 21 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    509 , 136 L.Ed.2d 399 (1996); Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 2003-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Batiste v. Brown 86 So. 3d 655 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council 5747, 2003-1583 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Boye v. Daiquiris & Creams No. 3, Inc. 80 So. 3d 505 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Eisenhardt, supra at 544-45 (citing Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), ; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. La.
  • Daigle v. City of Shreveport 78 So. 3d 753 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 2003-1533 (La.02/20/04), ; Moore v. Oak Meadows Apartments, 43,-620 (La.App.2d Cir.10/22/08), .
  • Jimenez v. OMNI ROYAL ORLEANS HOTEL 66 So. 3d 528 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    See Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1583, p. 9 (La.2/20/03), .
  • McGee v. Mutter 67 So. 3d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), ; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533, p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University, 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96), .
  • Monier v. St. Charles Parish School Board 65 So. 3d 731 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2011
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 7 (La.2/20/04); .
  • Warren v. Kenny 64 So. 3d 841 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    *846 “When sufficient time has been allowed for discovery, the courts will assess the proof submitted by the parties, equally without the former presumption in favor of trial on the merits, in order to dismiss meritless litigation.” Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 5 (La.2/20/04), n. 2 .
  • Sandoz v. Bourgeois 64 So. 3d 322 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2011
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 7 (La.2/20/04); .
  • Williams v. Ruben Residential Properties, LLC 58 So. 3d 534 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 2008-1583 (La.2/20/04), ; Moore v. Oak Meadows Apts., 43,620 (La.App.
  • Crutcher-Tufts Resources, Inc. v. Tufts 61 So. 3d 41 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 2003-1533, p. 8 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Cusimano v. Port Esplanade Condominium Ass'n 55 So. 3d 931 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 5 (La.2/20/04), n. 2 ; Independent Fire Insurance Co. v. Sunbeam Corp., 99-2181, p. 7 (La.2/29/00), .
  • Dwight Phillips and Joy Phillips, Indiv., Etc. v. Lafayette Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Phillips v. Lafayette Parish School Board 54 So. 3d 739 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Craig Steven Arabie v. Citgo Petroleum Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Arabie v. Citgo Petroleum Corp. 49 So. 3d 529 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Glass v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. 50 So. 3d 832 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2010
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 7 (La.2/20/04); .
  • Pertuit v. Tenant Louisiana Health Systems 49 So. 3d 932 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    See Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, pp. 4-5 (La.2/20/04), ; La.
  • Gunderson v. F.A. Richard & Associates 44 So. 3d 779 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Pruitt v. Nale 46 So. 3d 780 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), ; Hardy v. Bowie, 98-2821 (La.9/8/99), .
  • Clark Gunderson, M.D. v. F. A. Richard & Associates, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04)
  • Beckham v. Jungle Gym, L.L.C. 37 So. 3d 564 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    art. 966; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Ezeb v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals 50 So. 3d 166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    See Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2004), .
  • Saylor v. VIGUET 30 So. 3d 1182 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • Vanna Darlene McManus, Etc. v. State of La., Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University, 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96)
  • McManus v. State, Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries 33 So. 3d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), ; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University, 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96), .
  • Shuff v. Brookshire Grocery Co. 32 So. 3d 1030 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    art. 966; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Adonis Cole Weeks v. Sunstream, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    2/20/04), Gladney v. Milam, 39,982 (La.App.2d Cir. 9/21/05)
  • Gatlin v. KLEINHEITZ 34 So. 3d 872 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    See also Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), (holding that “[ajffida-vits in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment must be filed into evidence at the hearing on the motion or filed into the record in order for the affidavits to be part of the record on appeal.” (Emphasis added.)).
  • Moreno Properties Two, LLC v. Acadiana Investment Group, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Moreno Properties Two, L.L.C. v. Acadiana Investment Group, L.L.C. 25 So. 3d 232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • J. Caldarera & Co. v. St. James Parish Hospital Service District 28 So. 3d 1112 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Crawley v. Coastal Bridge Co. Inc. 24 So. 3d 315 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 574-7, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), ; Hardy v. Bowie, 98-2821 (La.9/8/99), -610 .
  • Brooks v. Minnieweather 16 So. 3d 1244 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus Council 5747, 2003-1533 (La.2/20/04), ; Gladney v. Milam, 39,982 (La.App.
  • Eisenhardt v. Snook 8 So. 3d 541 La. 2009
    Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging, Inc., 08-0528 (La.12/2/08), ; Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University, 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96), .
  • Arrow Financial Services, Lla v. Carol E. Sorrell La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • ARROW FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC v. Sorrell 999 So. 2d 1261 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Jeansonne v. South Central Bell Telephone Co. 8 So. 3d 613 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2009
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 2003-1533 (La.2/20/04), .
  • Monterrey Center, LLC v. Ed.ucation Partners, Inc. 5 So. 3d 225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533 (La.2/20/04), ; see Boland v. West Feliciana Parish Police Jury, 03-1297 (La.App.
  • Dauzat v. Curnest Guillot Logging Inc. 995 So. 2d 1184 La. 2008
    Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, 03-1533 at p. 9 (La.2/20/04), ; Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University , 95-1466, 95-1487 at p. 11 (La.5/10/96), .
  • Wade Phillips v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    2/20/04), the supreme court stated that “[a]ffidavits in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment must be filed into evidence at the hearing on the motion or filed into the record in order for the affidavits to be part of the record on appeal.” New Hampshire argues that Denoux v. Vessel Mgmt.
  • Phillips v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. 997 So. 2d 774 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Furthermore, in Hutchinson v. Knights of Columbus, Council No. 5747, 03-1533, p. 4 (La.2/20/04), , the supreme court stated that "[a]ffidavits in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment must be filed into evidence at the hearing on the motion or filed into the record in order for the affidavits to be part of the record on appeal."