Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Richardson v. Richardson, 974 So. 2d 761.
- Eduardo Granados v. Jamie Lopez Granados La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
-
Alfred Conhagen, Inc. of Louisiana v. Ruhrpumpen, Inc. and Waldemar S. Nelson and Company, Inc.
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
App. 4 Cir. 12/28/07), -72 (quoting George Pugh, Robert Force, Gerald Rault and Kerry Triche, Handbook on Louisiana Evidence Law, p. 300 (2006 Ed.).
- Charlie Pham v. Chi Kim Bui La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
-
Evans v. Evans
247 So. 3d 120
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 12/28/07), , 774, this Court explained the burden of proof to modify child custody as follows: In Evans v. Lungrin , 97-0541, 97-0577 (La.
-
Fie, LLC v. New Jax Condo Ass'n, Inc.
241 So. 3d 372
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 12/28/07), , 769.
-
Johnson v. Tucker
243 So. 3d 1237
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 12/28/07), .
-
Mathes v. Faucheux
226 So. 3d 503
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 12/28/07), .
- Levy v. Lewis 219 So. 3d 1150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
-
Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University v. Boudreaux's Tire & Auto Repair, L.L.C.
133 So. 3d 1262
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 12/28/07) , -72 .
- Foshee v. Foshee 123 So. 3d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
-
Gisleson v. Deputy
122 So. 3d 1089
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 12/28/07), (citing Boykins v. Boykins, 04-0999, p. 4 (La.App.
-
Willis v. Meilleur
96 So. 3d 1259
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 12/28/07) , -72 .
- Rooney v. Becnel 81 So. 3d 882 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
- McFall v. Armstrong 75 So. 3d 30 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2011
- Kaye v. Rebennack 60 So. 3d 1276 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
-
Molony v. Harris
60 So. 3d 70
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 *77 Cir. 12/28/07) , ).
-
Herbert and Martha Dalme v. Leah Dalme
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
4 Cir. 12/28/07), applies to this case.
-
Dalme v. Dalme
21 So. 3d 477
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
4 Cir. 12/28/07) , , applies to this case.
- Palazzolo v. Mire 10 So. 3d 748 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
-
Kees v. Kees
992 So. 2d 568
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
4 Cir. 12/28/07), , this Court determined: [We are] not bound to make a mechanical evaluation of all of the statutory factors listed in article 134, but should decide each case on its own facts in light of those factors.