Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ferguson v. Belcher and Son, 88 So. 2d 806.

18 citing documents.

Johnson v. Orleans Parish School Board 80 So. 3d 1175 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
(1956), the Court indicated that “the burden is on the one seeking the reformation to prove the error, and he must carry said burden by clear, and the strongest possible proof.” Id.
Hope v. S & J DIVING, INC. 996 So. 2d 50 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
(1956), the Court indicated that "the burden is on the one seeking the reformation to prove the error, and he must carry said burden by clear, and the strongest possible proof."
Samuels v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 939 So. 2d 1235 La. 2006
(1956), this Court indicated that "the burden is on the one seeking the reformation to prove the error, and he must carry said burden by clear, and the strongest possible proof."
Staten v. Security Industrial Ins. Co. 414 So. 2d 1328 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1982
(1956); Reynaud v. Bullock, 195 La.
Bonadona v. Guccione 362 So. 2d 740 La. 1978
In reaching a contrary conclusion (i. e., in favor of non-coverage), the intermediate court relied upon decisions which held that clear and convincing evidence of mutual mistake or fraud was required to reform an insurance contract so that it covered a risk not covered or excluded by its terms: , (1956); (La.App.
Bonadona v. Guccione 354 So. 2d 715 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Witherwax v. Zurich Insurance Company 315 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
943 , (1965); (2) Ferguson v. Belcher & Son, , (1956); (3) Rougeau v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins.
B. Segall Company, Inc. v. Trahan 290 So. 2d 854 La. 1974
29 (1940); , (1956); and Agurs v. Holt, 232 La.
Rougeau v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 262 So. 2d 803 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1972
Neuman v. B & B Pile Driving, Inc. 232 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Broussard, et al. v. Janin, et al. La.App., ; Ferguson v. Belcher & Son, , ; Bindewald v. Gurtler, Hebert & Co., Inc., La.App., .” We agree with the conclusions of the Lower Court that no evidence of negligence was shown on the part of B & B Pile Driving, Inc. nor their employees and, accordingly, the judgment of the Lower Court will be affirmed.
Dick v. Phillips 205 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
Ferguson v. Belcher & Son, , ; Second Church of Christ, Scientist v. Spencer, 230 La.
Ike v. Home Indemnity Co. 205 So. 2d 203 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., La.App., ; Bindewald v. Gurtler, Hebert & Company, La.App., ; Harness v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., ; , ; Boyle v. Travelers Insurance Company, La.App., , writs refused 245 La.
Walker v. National Union Fire Insurance 178 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
See Harness v. Toye Brothers Yellow Cab Company, La.App., ; , ; Boyle v. Travelers Insurance Company, La.App., , writs refused 245 La.
Harness v. Toye Brothers Yellow Cab Company 170 So. 2d 737 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
422, ; Second Church of Christ, Scientist v. Spencer, 230 La.
Williams v. Checker Cab Co. of New Orleans 145 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Ferguson v. Belcher & Son, , ; Bindewald v. Gurtler, Hebert & Co., Inc., .
Richard v. Barker 124 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Broussard et al. v. Janin et al., La.App., ; Ferguson v. Belcher & Son, , ; Bindewald v. Gurtler, Hebert & Co., Inc., La.App., .
Breaux v. Simon 104 So. 2d 168 La. 1958
94 , ; , ; and McNeill v. Elchinger, 231 La.
Jackson v. Young 99 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Unless the District Court committed manifest error in determining the facts, they will not be disturbed on appeal, , .