DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hood v. Cotter, 5 So. 3d 819.

110 citing documents.

  • Lalonde v. Vallot 168 So. 3d 457 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    12/2/08), , which dismissed the insured doctor’s claims against his insurer, concluding that because the insured did not purchase continuing coverage, or “tail coverage” after his elaims-made policy expired, he ceased to be a qualified health care provider under the Medical Malpractice Act.
  • Bass Custom Signs, LLC v. Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Bass Custom Signs, LLC v. Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government 149 So. 3d 965 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • State v. Watson 151 So. 3d 120 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    Eagle Pipe & Supply, supra; Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Joyce Gorman v. City of Opelousas 148 So. 3d 888 La. 2014
    Relying on Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, 08-0237 (La.12/2/08), , the trial court observed that “the policy language limiting coverage to those claims made and reported during the policy period did not serve to limit [Gorman’s] right of action.” In accordance with Hood , the trial court explained that the policy language “provides the scope of coverage bargained for by the [City]”
  • Susan Arnaud, Et Ux. v. Ronald Dies La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    No Right of Action “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008- 0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Arnaud v. Dies 153 So. 3d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    No Right of Action “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Ronnie Ceasar v. Chase Bank USA, N.A. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008– 0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Nellie Pierce v. Atlantic Richfield Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008– 0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Pierce v. Atlantic Richfield Co. 161 So. 3d 679 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause *685 of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Marcus Miller v. Harold J. Thibeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    2272, 10- 2275, 10-2279, 20-2289, pp. 6-7 (La.10/25/11), -56: “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Mayra Artigue v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-215, p. 6 (La.12/2/08)
  • Miller v. Thibeaux 153 So. 3d 1134 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    o right of action in Eagle Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267, 10-2272, 10-2275, 10-2279, 202289, pp. 6-7 (La.10/25/11), , 255-56: “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Artigue v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 154 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-215, p. 6 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Whitney Gary v. Jefferson Davis Council on the Aging, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-215 (La.12/2/08)
  • Lawler v. Government Employees Insurance 131 So. 3d 984 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2013
    Louisiana High School Athletics Ass’n, Inc., supra, citing Hood v. Cotter, 08-215 (La.12/2/08); .
  • Mid-South Plumbing, L.L.C. v. Development Consortium-Shelly Arms, L.L.C. 126 So. 3d 732 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
    4 Cir. 3/27/13) ; Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Rebel Distributors Corp. v. Luba Workers' Comp. 144 So. 3d 825 La. 2013
    See Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, 08-0237, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Williams v. Peerless Insurance Co. 123 So. 3d 204 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
    Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, 0237 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Soileau v. Smith True Value & Rental 144 So. 3d 771 La. 2013
    Green v. Auto Club Group Insurance Company, 2008-2868 (La.10/28/09), , 184 |,(citing Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215 (La.12/2/08), ; Cacamo v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, 99-3479 (La.6/30/00), ; and Descant v. Administrators of Tulane Educational Fund, 93-3098 (La.7/5/94), ).
  • Humble v. Pafford EMS 116 So. 3d 878 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
    Eagle Pipe and Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 2010-2267 (La.10/25/11), ; Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Holt v. Torino 117 So. 3d 182 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
  • Raymond Charles, Sr. v. Towing and Recovery Professionals of Louisiana Trust La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    10/25/11), -56: “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008– 0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Charles v. Towing & Recovery Professionals of Louisiana, Inc. 156 So. 3d 84 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    right of action in Eagle Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267, 10-2272, 10-2275, 10-2279, 20-2289, pp. 6-7 (La.10/25/11), , 255-56: “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Lions Gate Films, Inc. v. Jonesfilm 113 So. 3d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), ; Badeaux v. Southwest Computer Bureau, Inc., 2005-0612, 2005-0719, pp. 6-7 (La.3/17/06), .
  • Louisiana High School Athletics Ass'n v. State 107 So. 3d 583 La. 2013
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-215, p. 9 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Luther v. IOM Co. 109 So. 3d 467 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
    See Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, 2008-0237 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Thibco Investments, LLC v. Robert Thibodeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • State of La., Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries v. Gulfport Energy Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    10/25/11), -56 (additional citations omitted): “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • George Raymond Williams, M.D. v. Sif Consultants of Louisiana, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • Williams v. SIF Consultants of Louisiana, Inc. 103 So. 3d 1172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In the settlement documents, Plaintiffs expressly reserved the right to proceed against “any and all insurers.” | /‘The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 08-215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Thibco Investments, LLC v. Thibodeaux 102 So. 3d 1043 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • State, Department of Wildlife & Fisheries v. Gulfport Energy Corp. 125 So. 3d 468 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    late review of a ruling on this exception in Eagle Pipe v. Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267, pp. 6-7 (La.10/25/11), -56 (additional citations omitted): “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Udomeh v. Joseph 103 So. 3d 343 La. 2012
  • Darnell Carter v. Steak House Steaks, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    10/25/11), -56, as follows: “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08)
  • Carter v. Steak House Steaks, Inc. 107 So. 3d 97 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    ion in Eagle Pipe and Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267,10-2272, 10-2275, 10-2279, 10-2289, pp. 6-7 (La.10/25/11), -56 , as follows: “The function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause *99 of action asserted in the suit.” Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), .
  • State ex rel. Plaquemines Parish School Board v. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources 99 So. 3d 1028 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Mentz Construction Services, Inc. v. Poche 87 So. 3d 273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), , citing La.
  • Eagle Pipe and Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corporation 79 So. 3d 246 La. 2011
    Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215, p. 17 (La.12/2/08), , *256 829.
  • Schwegmann Family Trust No. 2 v. White III, LLC 76 So. 3d 1228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Art. 966 A(2) and B. Thus, we determine the same issues as does the trial court: “whether there is any genuine issue of material fact, and whether the mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, p. 8 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Bennett v. RYDER TRUCK RENTAL, INC. 66 So. 3d 1154 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Arregui v. Risk Management Services, LLC 62 So. 3d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Phillpott, supra, citing, Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Wright v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 57 So. 3d 382 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    Hood v. Cotter, 2008-0215 (La.12/2/08), , quoting Sol Kroll, “The Professional Liability Policy ‘Claims Made,’ ” 13 Forum 842, 843 (1978); Guthrie v. Louisiana Medical Mut.
  • Bruno v. Bellsouth/The Berry Co. 59 So. 3d 1265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, p. 9 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Bell v. Parry 61 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Using this language, the Supreme Court recently made it clear in Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, (La.12/2/08), , that there is no coverage for any claim not made and reported before the expiration of a claims-made policy, even if the claim arose before the policy expired.
  • Oubre v. Louisiana Citizens Fair Plan 53 So. 3d 492 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    *499 Hood, v. Cotter, 08-215, p. 7 (La.12/2/08), ; La.
  • Phipps v. Schupp 45 So. 3d 593 La. 2010
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, p. 9 (La.12/2/08), .
  • C & C Energy, L.L.C. v. Cody Investments, L.L.C. 41 So. 3d 1134 La. 2010
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215, 08-0237, p. 9 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp. v. Louisiana Tax Commission 32 So. 3d 199 La. 2010
    Hood v. Cotter, 08-0215 (La.12/2/08), .
  • Oscar Gray, Jr. v. Mel Credeur La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010