DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite In Re Miller, 2 So. 3d 418.

25 citing documents.

  • Johnny Carval Havard v. Ricky Jeanlouis, Et Al. La. 2022
    2/13/09), (per curiam); Kevin Associates, L.L.C. v. Crawford, 03-0211, p. 11 (La.
  • Berkley Assurance Company v. Melissa Willis, as parent/guardian of MacY Lee Willis La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2021
    2/13/09), ); Banquer v. Guidroz, 09-466, pp. 3-4 (La.
  • Johnny Carval Havard v. Ricky Jeanlouis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
    2/13/09), Terrell v. Fontenot, 11-1472 (La.App.
  • Darius Troy Barras and Julie A. Barras v. Cardinal Services, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
    2/13/09), (per curiam), the supreme court held that the insured’s waiver of UM coverage was valid when it contained the printed name of the insured and the signature and mitials of the insured’s representative, whose authority to sign the waiver was established by affidavit.
  • Aaron Allen Stall v. Mercury Ins. Co. of Florida La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    2/13/09), the supreme court held that when a legal representative signs a UM coverage waiver form and the name of the corporate insured is printed on the form, it is unnecessary for the name of the insured to be included on the form.
  • Stall v. Mercury Ins. Co. of Fla. 237 So. 3d 44 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    2/13/09), , the supreme court held that when a legal representative signs a UM coverage waiver form and the name of the corporate insured is printed on the form, it is unnecessary for the name of the insured to be included on the form.
  • Vitelaro v. Zanca 195 So. 3d 1259 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Co., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), .
  • Rapalo-Alfaro v. Lee 173 So. 3d 1174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Co., 08-2874, p. 2 (La.2/13/09), .
  • Voinche v. Capps 150 So. 3d 297 La. 2014
    See Harper v. Direct General Insurance Co. of Louisiana, 08-2874 at p. 3 (La.2/13/09), (“Liberty Mutual has further established through an unrefuted affidavit that Mr. Jenchel is the Director of Risk Management for Sears, and was authorized to reject UM coverage on behalf of Sears”).
  • In re Miller 139 So. 3d 993 La. 2014
    In re: Miller, 09-0271 (La.2/11/09), .
  • Garay-Lara v. Cornerstone National Insurance Co. 145 So. 3d 423 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    See Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, 2008-2874 (La.2/13/09), , holding that a typed name and date are insufficient to invalidate an otherwise valid rejection.
  • Davis v. Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance 129 So. 3d 811 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Co., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), , the Supreme Court reversed the lower court rulings finding that UM waiver forms were defective where a legal representative had printed the corporate name instead of his own name on the form.
  • Duke v. Evans 104 So. 3d 464 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    Co., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), , the supreme court pointed out that in Duncan , the court stated that a valid rejection form could contain the name and signature of either the named insured or the legal representative.
  • Terrell v. Fontenot 96 So. 3d 658 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Co., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), , and Banquer v. Guidroz, 09-466 (La.5/15/09), .
  • James Bergeron v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    2/13/09), and Banquer v. Guidroz, 09-466 (La.
  • Bergeron v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 92 So. 3d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, OS-2874, (La.2/13/09), , and Banquer v. Guidroz, 09-466 (La.5/15/09), , our supreme court recognized that when a corporation is rejecting UM coverage, the requirement that the insured or the insured’s legal representative sign the form is met when an officer or employee of the corporation who has the authority to reject UM cover
  • Peña v. Simeon 96 So. 3d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Co., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), , the Court explained that “as long as the name of the named insured is printed and the legal representative signs the form,” tasks three and four are satisfied.
  • Bordelon v. Western Heritage Insurance Co. 48 So. 3d 421 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Co., 2008-2874 (La.2/13/09), , citing Duncan v. U.S.A.A.
  • In Re Miller 34 So. 3d 839 La. 2010
    In re: Miller, 09-0271 (La.2/11/09), .
  • Hingle v. Scottsdale Insurance Co. 25 So. 3d 143 La. 2010
    See Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), .
  • Hingle v. Scottsdale Insurance Company 25 So. 3d 143 La. 2010
    See Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), .
  • 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), .
  • Banquer v. Guidroz 8 So. 3d 559 La. 2009
    ACE asserts that the decision of the First Circuit, rendered on December 23, 2008, must be 14reversed as it conflicts with our recent holding in Harper v. Direct General Insurance Co., 08-2874 (La.2/13/09), .
  • National Interstate Insurance v. Plain 12 So. 3d 973 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    National Interstate alleges that our original opinion is inconsistent with the Louisiana Supreme Court decision in Harper v. Direct General Insurance Company, et al, 2008-2874 (La.2/13/09), , handed down the same date as our original opinion.