DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 983 So. 2d 798.

134 citing documents.

  • Buffman Inc. v. Lafayette Insurance Co. 36 So. 3d 1004 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 7 (La.5/21/08), -805 (emphasis added; ellipses indicate citations omitted).
  • Everett v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. 37 So. 3d 456 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 2007-2110, pp. 5-6 (La.5/21/08), ; Baxter v. Sonat Offshore Drilling Inc., 98-1054, p. 6 (La.App.
  • In Re Barthelemy 35 So. 3d 388 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 11 (La.5/21/08), , 807 Dr. Boyle, a fellowship-trained surgical oncologist board certified as a general surgeon was accepted as an expert in the field of general surgery.
  • Barthelemy v. State ex rel. Louisiana State University Health Science Center 35 So. 3d 388 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 11 (La.5/21/08), , 807 Dr. Boyle, a fellowship-trained surgical oncologist board certified as a general surgeon was accepted as an expert in the field of general surgery.
  • Brewer v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. 35 So. 3d 230 La. 2010
    As we noted in Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110 (La.5/21/08), : The rule of law requiring an appellate court to exercise great restraint before upsetting a jury verdict is based, in part, on respect for the jury determination rendered by citizens chosen from the community who serve a valuable role in *239 the judicial system.
  • Abney v. Smith 35 So. 3d 279 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 2007-2110, p. 8 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Pollard v. Alpha Technical 31 So. 3d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    The Louisiana Supreme Court in Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, pp. 10-11 (La.5/21/08), -07 , stated: _J_UWhere the findings are based on determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses, the manifest error standard demands great deference to the findings of fact.
  • Cotton v. DELTA QUEEN STEAMBOAT CO., INC. 36 So. 3d 262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 10-11 (La.5/21/08), -807 , our Supreme Court further explained: ...
  • Bethel Roberts v. American Century Casualty Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Larry Davie Meaux v. Hilcorp Energy Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Roberts v. AMERICAN CENTURY CASUALTY COMPANY 25 So. 3d 255 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Meaux v. Hilcorp Energy Co. 26 So. 3d 875 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    “[A] reviewing court must exercise great restraint before disregarding a jury verdict and turning to de novo review,” Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Yee v. Imperial Fire & Casualty Ins. Co. 25 So. 3d 872 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    Adams v. Rhodia Inc., 2007-2110 (La.5/21/08), ; Green v. Nunley, supra.
  • Crawford v. DIAMOND B. CONSTRUCTION, LLC 17 So. 3d 521 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • Mitchell v. Villien 19 So. 3d 557 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    “An intervening cause is one which comes into play after the defendant’s negligent conduct has ceased, but before the plaintiff suffers injury.” Adams v. Rhodia, 07-2110 p. 13 (La.5/21/08) , citing Restatement (Second) Of Torts § 186 (1965); 1 Dan B. Dobbs, The Law of Torts § 186 (2001).
  • LeBlanc v. Landry 21 So. 3d 353 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, pp. 5-6 (La.5/21/08), ; Baxter v. Sonat Offshore Drilling Inc., 98-1054, p. 6 (La.App.
  • STARK SERVICES, INC. v. Wilkerson 10 So. 3d 896 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    5/21/08), , 806-07: The issue to be resolved by the reviewing court is not whether the trier of fact was right or wrong, but whether the factfinder's conclusion was a reasonable one.
  • Salassi v. Salassi 13 So. 3d 670 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 10 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Roland Brothers v. Direct General Insurance Co. of Louisiana La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Brothers v. Direct General Insurance Co. of Louisiana 11 So. 3d 1154 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    “[A]n appellate court should only disturb the trier of fact’s allocation of fault when it is clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.” Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 15 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Westcott v. Westcott 11 So. 3d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 10 (La.5/21/08), .
  • James Pickering v. Dr. Dalmacia Paraguya La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Pickering v. PARAGUYA 9 So. 3d 320 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Tony Lavalais v. Melissa E. Brister La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Lavalais v. Brister 7 So. 3d 126 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    “[W]here the findings are based on determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses, the manifest error standard demands great deference to the findings of fact.” Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 10 (La.5/21/08), -07 .
  • Jens v. Jones 8 So. 3d 132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Fault allocated by the trial court will not be altered by the appellate courts absent evidence that it was “clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous.” Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 15 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Beaucoudray v. Walsh 9 So. 3d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    “The issue to be resolved by the reviewing court is not whether the trier of fact was right or wrong, but whether the' fact finder’s conclusion was a reasonable one.” Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 10 (La.5/21/08), , writ granted (on another issue) 08-0185 (La.9/19/08), , citing Stobart v. State, Dept. of Transp.
  • Wooley v. Lucksinger 14 So. 3d 311 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    |7nIn Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 2007-2110, pp. 6-8 (La.5/21/08), -05 , appears the following: Adequate jury instructions are those which fairly and reasonably point out the issues and which provide correct principles of law for the jury to apply to those issues.
  • Adams v. Rhodia, Inc. 5 So. 3d 288 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 2007-2110 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Walter A. Glod, Jr., M.D. v. W. Gregory Baker La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    5/21/08), -05, as follows: Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1792(B) requires the trial court to instruct jurors on the law applicable to the cause submitted to them.
  • Glod v. Baker 998 So. 2d 308 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    The supreme court recently discussed the law and principles applicable in instructing a jury on the law and the appellate's court responsibility when reviewing those instructions in Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, pp. 5-8 (La.5/21/08), -05 , as follows: Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 1792(B) requires the trial court to instruct jurors on the law applicable to the cause submitted to them.
  • Adams v. Rhodia, Inc. 992 So. 2d 968 La. 2008
    This matter is remanded to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, for consideration in light of Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110 (La.5/21/08), .
  • Adams v. RHODIA, INC. 992 So. 2d 968 La. 2008
    This matter is remanded to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, for consideration in light of Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110 (La.5/21/08), .
  • In Re Succession of Wagner 993 So. 2d 709 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    Adams v. Rhodia, Inc., 07-2110, p. 10 (La.5/21/08), .