Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Duncan v. USAA Ins. Co., 950 So. 2d 544.

434 citing documents.

Isadore v. Interface Security Systems 58 So. 3d 1071 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Co., [06-363 (La.11/29/06)], , [see La.Code Civ.P.]
Doyle v. Allstate Insurance Co. 58 So. 3d 606 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Insurance Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), and because it does not contain the company name in the designated | ^location according to bulletin number 98-01, 6 promulgated by the commissioner of insurance.
Gullatt v. Allstate Insurance Co. 61 So. 3d 731 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Insurance Company, 2006-363 (La.11/29/06), , the Louisiana Supreme Court explained the statutory requirements of a valid UM form.
Sharon Lecroy v. Byrd Regional Hospital La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
11/29/06)], [see La.Code Civ.P.]
LeCroy v. Byrd Regional Hospital 56 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Co., [06-363 (La.11/29/06) ], , [see La.Code Civ.P.]
Upchurch v. State, ex rel. Louisiana Department of Transportation 57 So. 3d 361 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), ; Pruitt v. Nale, 45,483 (La.App.
In Re Melancon 62 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Insurance Company, 06-363 (La.11/29/06), , when a law is clear and unambiguous and its application does not lead to absurd consequences, the law shall be applied as written and no further interpretation may be made in search of the intent of the legislature.
Ware v. Gemini Insurance Co. 51 So. 3d 179 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), , that the expression of a desire not to have a UM coverage does not necessarily constitute a valid rejection if the rejection does not meet the formal requirements of the law.
Bordelon v. Western Heritage Insurance Co. 48 So. 3d 421 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-0363 (La.11/29/06), .
Jonathon Guillory v. Progressive Security Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Derrick Gabriel v. Louisiana Organ Procurement Agency La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
11/29/06)], [see La.Code Civ.P.]
Gabriel v. Louisiana Organ Procurement Agency 48 So. 3d 1192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., [06-363 (La.11/29/06)], , [see La.Code Civ.P.]
Guillory v. Progressive Security Ins. Co. 47 So. 3d 12 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363 p. 4 (La.11/29/06), .
Cascio v. Twin Cities Development, LLC 48 So. 3d 341 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-368 (La.11/29/06), ; see also La.
David Drive Enterprises, LLC v. Subway Real Estate Corp. 49 So. 3d 913 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363, (La.11/29/06), .
Emery v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. 49 So. 3d 17 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Insurance Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), ; see LSA-C.C.P.
Adams v. JPD Energy, Inc. 46 So. 3d 751 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-368 (La.11/29/06), ; See also LSA-C.C.P.
Pruitt v. Nale 46 So. 3d 780 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), ; Morris v. Union Parish Police Jury, 39,709 (La.
Washington v. Allstate Insurance Co. 44 So. 3d 792 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363, p. 4 (La.11/29/06), .
Enduracoat Technologies, Inc. v. Watson Bowman Acme Corp. 42 So. 3d 1107 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-0363, p. 3 (La.11/29/06), -47 .
Andre Alexander v. the Estate of Maurice D. McNeal La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), thus neither waiver was valid.
Alexander v. Estate of McNeal 44 So. 3d 338 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), , thus neither waiver was valid.
Dugan v. WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC. 41 So. 3d 1263 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-363 (La.l1/29/06), ; See also LSA-C.C.P.
Shane Kerry v. Charles Pearson, M.D. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
11/29/06)], [see La.Code Civ.P.]
Kerry v. Pearson 40 So. 3d 463 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., [06— 363 (La.11/29/06) ], , [see La.
Reilly v. SPINAZZE 34 So. 3d 1069 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-363 (La.11/29/06), ; See also LSA-C.C.P.
Taylor v. US AGENCIES CAS. INS. CO. 38 So. 3d 433 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-0363 (La.11/29/06), , "must be completed before the UM selection form is signed by the insured, such that the signature of the insured or the insured's representative signifies an acceptance of and agreement with all of the information contained on the form."
Taylor v. U.S. Agencies Casualty Insurance Co. 38 So. 3d 433 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-0363 (La.11/29/06), , “must be completed before the UM selection form is signed by the insured, such that the signature of the insured or the insured’s representative signifies an acceptance of and agreement with all of the information contained on the form.” Gray , 07-1670 at p. 14, 977 So.2d at 849 .
Rizzo v. Ward 32 So. 3d 986 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 06-363, p. 4-5 (La.11/29/06), .
Crotwell v. Cobbins 30 So. 3d 283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Scientific Drilling International,inc. v. Lafayette Parish School Board Sales Tax Division La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-363[,] p. 3 (La.11/29/06), see [La.Code Civ.P.]
Scientific Drilling International, Inc. v. Meche 29 So. 3d 1283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Co., 2006-363[,] p. 3 (La.11/29/06), , see [La.Code Civ.
Alvarez v. LeBlanc 31 So. 3d 1120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
06-363, p. 12 (La.11/29/06), -47 .
Charlotte Broussard v. Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
11/29/06), see [La.Code Civ.P.]
Broussard v. Hertz Equipment Rental Corp. 27 So. 3d 337 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Co., 2006-363[,] p. 3 (La.11/29/06), , see [La.Code Civ.P.]
Distinguished National Interstate Insurance Co. v. Collins 21 So. 3d 316 La. 2009
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), ; see Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, et al., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), .
Distinguished NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Collins 21 So. 3d 316 La. 2009
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), ; see Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, et al., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), .
Keith Allen Portie v. Flavin Realty, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
11/29/06), see [La.Code Civ.P.]
Theresa Gibson v. Lafayette Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Co., 06-0363, p. 4 (La.11/29/06), -547.
Portie v. Flavin [Realty] Inc. 22 So. 3d 1143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., 2006-363[,] p. 3 (La.11/29/06), , see [La.Code Civ.P.]
MOLBERT v. Thomas 18 So. 3d 801 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Brandy L. Molbert v. Brandon L. Thomas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Priola Construction Corporation v. Profast Development Group, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Co., 06-0363, p. 4 (La.11/29/06), -547.
Maggie Sepulvado Manshack v. Mary Garcia Kershaw La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Co., 06-0363, p. 4 (La.11/29/06), -547.
Priola Construction Corp. v. Profast Development Group, Inc. 21 So. 3d 456 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., 06-0363, p. 4 (La.11/29/06), -547 .
Keen v. Ashley 21 So. 3d 987 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Co., 2006-0363 (La.11/29/06), , and the more recent dictum that “rote completion of the six tasks” did not necessarily satisfy all requirements for a valid waiver.
Shear v. Champagne 22 So. 3d 942 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., 2006-363 (La.11/29/06), , noting that in 1997, the Legislature amended La.
Versluis v. GULF COAST TRANSIT CO. 17 So. 3d 459 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., 2006-363 p. 3 (La.11/29/06), , see La.
McElroy v. Continental Casualty Co. 15 So. 3d 377 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Co., 2006-363 (La.11/29/06), ; A.I.U.
Flores v. Doe 19 So. 3d 1196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., 06-363 (La.11/29/06), .