Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Donner Corporation, 236 So. 2d 841.

20 citing documents.

Antis v. Miller 613 So. 2d 1034 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
Dugal & Trahan, Ltd. Pension Trust v. Roy O. Martin Lumber Co. 510 So. 2d 1356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Coon v. Placid Oil Co. 493 So. 2d 1236 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Wetzka v. Big Three Industries, Inc. 409 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Gormley 357 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Distinguished STATE DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS v. Mims 336 So. 2d 24 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
We distinguish State, (La.App.
State, Dept. of Highways v. Oil Mark Corp. 324 So. 2d 606 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1976
We find the expression of the court in State, to be the appropriate rule and we quote as follows: "We find no merit to plaintiff's contention that the expert witness fees should be eliminated completely.
State, Department of Highways v. Gordy 322 So. 2d 418 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
State, Dept. of Hwys. v. Ross Continental Motor Lodge, Inc. 315 So. 2d 151 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Evergreen Plantation, Inc. v. Zunamon 319 So. 2d 543 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1975
State, Dept. of Highways v. Beaird-Poulan, Inc. 292 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1974
With respect to the question which has arisen concerning defendant's expertwitness fees, : "A witness who is qualified and who testifies as an expert in a trial is entitled to additional compensation, to be fixed by the court, with reference to the value of time employed and the degree of learning or skill required.
State, Dept. of Hwys. v. Beauregard Dev. Co., Inc. 279 So. 2d 787 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
Dixie Electric Membership Corporation v. McDowell 280 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
State, Department of Highways v. Hickman 277 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
His findings of value, based on such evidence, will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous, (3rd Cir. 1970).
State Ex Rel. Department of Highways v. Stegemann 269 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
While an agreement between an expert witness and one of the parties to a suit is no criterion to be used alone by the trial court in fixing expert fees when the fees are not reasonable or commensurate with the work performed by the expert, (La.App.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Pommier 270 So. 2d 274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Smith 270 So. 2d 178 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
The Department correctly notes, on authority of State, through the Department of Highways v. Donner Corporation, La.App., , that an agreement between an appraiser and a party to a suit as to the appraiser’s fee, is not the criterion to be used by the Court in assessing expert fees.
Dixie Electric Membership Corp. v. Watts 268 So. 2d 128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Polites v. Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. 267 So. 2d 214 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Mc-Kowen v. McCraine, La.App., ; State, Through Dept. of Highways v. Donner Corporation, La.App., ; Barnett v. Barnett Enterprises, Inc., La.App., ; Wappler v. Braucht, La.App., ; Engle v. Hardouin, La.App., ; Prampin v. Southern Chemical Works, La.App., ; Duvernay v. Airey, La.App., 172 So.
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. LeBlanc 254 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971