Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Detraz v. Lee, 950 So. 2d 557.

101 citing documents.

Medical Review Panel Proceedings for the Claim of Serpas v. Tulane University Hospital & Clinic 161 So. 3d 726 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), ; Stobart v. State Through Dep’t of Transp.
Jonathan Parker v. Flanagan Inspection & Testing, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
1/17/07), (citing Smith v. La.
Oleszkowicz v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 129 So. 3d 1272 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
Marti Cochran v. Safeway Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Cochran v. Safeway Insurance Co. 128 So. 3d 1286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), .
Wilkins v. City of Shreveport 124 So. 3d 20 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1263 (La.1/17/07), ; Hall v. Folger Coffee Co., 2003-1734 (La.4/14/04), ; Smith v. City of Shreveport, 46,596 (La.App.
Roland Lee Lewis v. Proline Systems, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Lewis v. Proline Systems, Inc. 117 So. 3d 289 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), .
Aghighi v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp. 119 So. 3d 930 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 6 (La.1/17/07), ; Hall v. Folger Coffee Co., 03-1734 (La.4/14/04), .
Serou v. Touro Infirmary 105 So. 3d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), .
Kimberly A. Myrick v. Jeremy M. Jones, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Our courts have consistently held “causation is a factual finding that should not be reversed on appeal absent manifest error.” Detraz v, Lee, 05-1263, p.7 (La.1/1/07)
State v. $144,320.00 Tina Beers 105 So. 3d 694 La. 2012
See, e.g., Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), (a tort case).
Henderson v. Gregory 93 So. 3d 818 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), ; Bruce v. State Farm Ins.
Kathy A. Darbonne, Et Ux. v. Bertrand Investments, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Donald Ray Brown v. Town of Ferriday La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Brown v. Town of Ferriday 76 So. 3d 155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
2 Cir. 4/4/07), (citing Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), ).
Gober v. Walgreen Louisiana Co. 80 So. 3d 9 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Littleton v. Richardson Medical Center, 42,082 (La.App.2d Cir.4/4/07), , citing Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), .
Smith v. City of Shreveport 73 So. 3d 496 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1268 (La.1/17/07), ; Hall v. Folger Coffee Company, 2003-1734 (La.4/14/4), .
Smith v. Transport Services Co. 67 So. 3d 487 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
1/17/07), -68 , Justice Victory stated: In my view, by applying this presumption to aid plaintiff in an ordinary negligence case.
La Louisiane Bakery Co. v. Lafayette Insurance Co. 61 So. 3d 17 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 5 (La.1/17/07), , 561 citing Pinsonneault, supra.
Thomas v. Comfort Center of Monroe, LA, Inc. 48 So. 3d 1228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
6 See Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, pp. 4-5 (La.1/17/07), , and Poland v. State Farm Mut.
Meaux v. Wendy's International, Inc. 51 So. 3d 778 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1263 (La.1/17/07), .
Williams v. Stewart 46 So. 3d 266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co. v. American Rent-All, Inc., (causation); Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 9 (La.1/17/07), -63 (causation and applicability of the Housley presumption); Touchard v. SLEMCO Elec.
Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Hayden 41 So. 3d 621 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), .
KAMPMANN v. Mason 42 So. 3d 411 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1263, p. 2 (La.1/17/07), .
Ford Motor Credit Company v. Dunham 25 So. 3d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Johnson v. Morehouse General Hospital 27 So. 3d 1085 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07)
Yee v. Imperial Fire & Casualty Ins. Co. 25 So. 3d 872 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1263 (La.1/17/07), .
Watters v. Department of Social Services 15 So. 3d 1128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 1 (La.1/17/07)(Victory, J., concurring), -68 .
Shaw v. PLANTATION MANAGEMENT, LLC 5 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Tompkins v. Savoie 10 So. 3d 294 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), , citing Hall v. Folger Coffee Co., 03-1734 (La.4/14/04), .
Ennis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 9 So. 3d 899 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
The Louisiana Supreme Court, in Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), , set forth the appellate standard of review as follows: Louisiana courts of appeal apply the manifest error standard of review in civil cases.
Kyle v. Smith 999 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Detraz v. Lee, XXXX-XXXX *133 (La.1/17/07), , and citations therein.
Osborne v. McKenzie 998 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Detraz v. Lee, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/17/07), .
Brown v. Trask 998 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
e.g., Detraz v. Lee, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/17/2007), (wherein the jury found defendant nail salon was negligent but that its negligence was not the cause-in-fact of the plaintiff's skin infection).
Billy Wayne Rachal, Jr. v. Kimberly W. Gilchrist La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
1/17/07), : Having been given the Housley instruction, the jury made the factual determination that defendants’ negligent conduct did not cause plaintiff’s injuries.
Rachal v. Gilchrist 995 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
As noted in Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 9 (La.1/17/07), , 563: Having been given the Housley instruction, the jury made the factual determination that defendants' negligent conduct did not cause plaintiff's injuries.
Bynog v. Valenzuela 978 So. 2d 1263 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
1/17/07), , 561-62: Louisiana courts of appeal apply the manifest error standard of review in civil cases.
Joseph M. Bynog, Jr. v. John Valenzuela La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
1/17/07), -62: Louisiana courts of appeal apply the manifest error standard of review in civil cases.
Everhardt v. LOUISIANA DOTD 978 So. 2d 1036 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), .
Henry Sanders v. State of La., Department of Natural Resources La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Sanders v. DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES 973 So. 2d 879 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), .
John E. Beard, Et Ux. v. Coregis Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
1/17/07), the Louisiana Supreme Court considered the propriety of a similar jury verdict form in a personal injury trial stemming from an allegedly negligent pedicure.
Beard v. Coregis Ins. Co. 968 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
In Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263 (La.1/17/07), , the Louisiana Supreme Court considered the propriety of a similar jury verdict form in a personal injury trial stemming from an allegedly negligent pedicure.
Coutee v. Beurlot 964 So. 2d 304 La. 2007
[3] STANDARD OF REVIEW The law applicable to the manifest error standard of review was recently discussed in Detraz v. Lee, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/17/07), .
Charles Layssard v. State of La., Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Layssard v. STATE, DEPART. OF PUBLIC SAFETY 963 So. 2d 1053 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 9 (La.1/17/07), .
McKee v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 964 So. 2d 1008 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
See Detraz v. Lee, 05-1263, p. 8 (La.1/17/07), .
Detraz v. Lee 955 So. 2d 1287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
After concluding that the jury was correct in failing to find causation in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court remanded this case so that we may “consider the plaintiffs remaining assignments of error.” Detraz v. Lee, d/b/a Virgin Nails, 05-1263, p. 12 (La.1/17/07), .
Littleton v. Richardson Medical Center 954 So. 2d 812 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Detraz v. Lee, 2005-1263 (La.1/17/07), .