Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Land v. Vidrine, 62 So. 3d 36.

92 citing documents.

Succession of Audrey Mae Johnson Tyler La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
Succession of Tyler 209 So. 3d 157 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Ruben Kilber v. Pnk (Lake Charles), LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
Kilber v. PNK (Lake Charles), LLC 201 So. 3d 943 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Miller v. State 192 So. 3d 763 La. 2016
See Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
State in the Interest of K. L. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
Blow v. OneBeacon America Insurance Co. 193 So. 3d 244 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
See Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, p. 5 (La.3/15/11), ; Savoie v. Rubin, 01-3275, 01-3276, p. 3 (La.6/21/02), .
Williams v. City of New Orleans 193 So. 3d 259 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
|r“The doctrine does not apply in the context of a trial court ruling on ¡interlocutory issues.” Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, p. 9 (La.3/15/11), .
Succession of Francis Stalter La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Succession of Stalter 182 So. 3d 1145 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
J. L. McCraine, III v. Voyellesland Farms, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
McCraine v. Voyellesland Farms, Inc. 177 So. 3d 811 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Vincent Alexander v. Albert Da Da" P. Menard " La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
3/15/11), (citations omitted).
Alexander v. Menard 215 So. 3d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
STANDARDS OF REVIEW “Questions of law, such as the proper interpretation of a statute, are reviewed by the appellate court under the de novo standard of review.” Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), (citations omitted).
Cynthia Bridges, SEC. Dept. of Rev., State of Louisiana v. Nelson Industrial Steam Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Bridges v. Nelson Industrial Steam Co. 169 So. 3d 711 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Theodule P. Noel, Jr. v. Theodule Pierre Noel, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Noel v. Noel 165 So. 3d 401 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Robert H. Rhyne, Jr. v. Omni Energy Services Corp. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Rhyne v. Omni Energy Services Corp. 155 So. 3d 155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Latoya Castille, Individually v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Castille v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Ins. Co. 150 So. 3d 614 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Omni Energy Services Corp. v. Robert H. Rhyne, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
3/15/12), “[f]ailure to timely file a writ application on a venue ruling amounts to a waiver of any objection thereto.” Thus, the April 27, 2011 judgment was a final judgment, and the transfer of the remaining issues to Lafayette Parish while the motions for new trial were still pending had no effect on that finality st
Omni Energy Services Corp. v. Rhyne 149 So. 3d 1282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Furthermore, no litigant sought a supervisory writ to have the venue decision reviewed by a higher court and, as pointed out in Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, p. 7 (La.3/15/11), , “[f|ailure to timely file a writ application on a venue ruling amounts to a waiver of any objection thereto.” Thus, the April 27, 2011 judgment was a final judgment, and the transfer of the remaining issues to Lafayette Parish while the motions for new trial were still pending had no effect on that finality stat
Kite Bros. LLC v. Kite Rv, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
3/15/11), in support of the assertion that challenges to venue rulings can only be made via applications for supervisory writs.
Jones v. Black 145 So. 3d 402 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
First NBC Bank v. Broussard 131 So. 3d 966 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
Venue In Land v. Vidrine, 2010-1342, p. 9 (La.3/15/11), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated, The trial court that is tasked with determining whether the case is perempted must consider all the grounds for per-emption, including whether the case was timely filed in a court of proper venue....
Starkey v. Starkey 122 So. 3d 579 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, p. 9 (La.3/15/11), ; Monlezun v. Lyon Interests, Inc., 11-576, p. 11 (La.App.
Felicia Clement v. Scott A. Citron La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Clement v. Citron 115 So. 3d 1260 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Murphy Cormier Contractor, Inc. v. State of La., Dept. of Health & Hospitals La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Murphy Cormier General Contractor, Inc. v. State, Department of Health & Hospitals 114 So. 3d 567 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Failure to timely file a writ application on a venue ruling amounts to a waiver of any objection thereto.” Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, p. 7 (La.3/15/11), .
Bobby C. Moore v. Succession of Patricia Gay Bruce Moore La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
3/15/11), (citations omitted).
Moore v. Succession of Moore 116 So. 3d 18 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), (citations omitted).
Carriere v. Bodenheimer, Jones, Szwak, & Winchell, L.L.P. 120 So. 3d 281 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
liThe supreme court stated in Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.03/15/11), , 42: La.
Josie Stokes Weatherly v. Fonseca & Associates, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
The case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration in light of this Court‟s recent decision of Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, (La.3/15/11) ” Weatherly v. Fonseca & Associates, LLC, 10-2461 (La.
Weatherly v. Fonseca & Associates, LLC 92 So. 3d 1206 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
The case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration in light of this Court’s *1209 recent decision of Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342 (La.3/15/11), .” Weatherly v. Fonseca & Associates, LLC, 10-2461 (La.6/17/11), .
Chumley v. White 80 So. 3d 39 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Land v. Vidrine, 2010-1342 (La.3/15/11), .
Lee J. Monlezun, M.D. v. Lyon Interests, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Monlezun v. Lyon Interests, Inc. 76 So. 3d 628 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
We also note that “[t]he doctrine does not apply in the context of a trial court ruling on interlocutory issues or a transferee court being asked to consider a ruling of the transferor court.” Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, p. 9 (La.3/15/11), .
Weatherly v. Fonseca & Associates, LLC 63 So. 3d 1027 La. 2011
The case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration in light of this Court’s recent decision of Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, (La.3/15/11) .
Weatherly v. FONSECA & ASSOCIATES, LLC 63 So. 3d 1027 La. 2011
The case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration in light of this Court's recent decision of Land v. Vidrine, 10-1342, (La.3/15/11) .