Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Noland v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 94 So. 2d 671.

60 citing documents.

Elmo v. Davis, Jr. v. Jimmy R. Fortenberry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Co., So.2d 671 (La.1957).
Davis v. Fortenberry 37 So. 3d 514 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Tolbert v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. 719 So. 2d 738 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Guy v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEVEP. 576 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
(1957); Smiciklas v. Groendyke Transport, Inc., writ denied, (La.
King v. Louviere 543 So. 2d 1327 La. 1989
Fontenot v. Boehm 512 So. 2d 1192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Otto v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 455 So. 2d 1175 La. 1984
Co., Meskill v. Allstate Ins.
Nicholson v. Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development 449 So. 2d 178 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
3rd Cir.1963); , (1957).
Nicholson v. LA. DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEVELOP. 449 So. 2d 178 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
3rd Cir.1963); , (1957).
Security Timber & Land Co. v. Reed 398 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
(1957).” The doctrine is further qualified as follows: “Parenthetically we note that the defense of sudden emergency is not available if the motorist fails to exercise the degree of care that a prudent person would use to extricate himself from the situation.” (La.App.
Johnigan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 345 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
Vaughn v. Hebert 333 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Gordon v. General Motors Corp. 323 So. 2d 496 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
See, for example, , (1957); Rizley v. Cutrer, 232 La.
Tillman v. Canal Insurance Co. 305 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Politz v. Traders & General Insurance Co. 285 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
See Noland v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. , ; (La.App.
Simon v. Ford Motor Company 282 So. 2d 126 La. 1973
Meskill v. Allstate Insurance Co. 247 So. 2d 163 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Kierum v. Stonewall Insurance Co. 247 So. 2d 166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Stonewall Insurance Co. v. Cross 244 So. 2d 327 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
1 Cir. 1967); , (1957); Dick v. Phillips, 253 La.
Bunch v. Frezier 239 So. 2d 680 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Skinner v. Scott, 238 La.
Belgard v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 227 So. 2d 24 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
(1st Cir. 1965); (2d Cir. 1963); (2d Cir. 1962); (3rd Cir. 1963); , (1957).
Perry v. Herrin 215 So. 2d 167 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Rizley v. Cutrer, 232 La.
Bauer v. Bauer 211 So. 2d 375 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
(1957); , La.App.2nd Cir. (1962); , La.App.2nd Cir. (1962); ; La.App.3rd Cir. (1962) , La.App.4th Cir. (1962).” *378 Having held that Mrs. Catherine Rawls had not borne the
Dean v. Orgeron 195 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
Kirkham v. Travelers Insurance Co. 192 So. 2d 630 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
(1957); Carhee v. Scott (La.App.)
Moreau v. American Casualty Co. 190 So. 2d 133 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1966
921 , ; , ; Mullins v. Pitre, La.App., ; Brown v. Head, La.App., ; Duhon v. Harkins, La.App., ; Travelers Fire Insurance Co. v. Meadows, La.App., .
Shively v. Hare 189 So. 2d 12 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Cutrer v. Travelers Indemnity Co. 170 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
666 , , , , Miller v. Hayes, La.App., .
Jones v. Continental Casualty Co. of Chicago, Ill. 169 So. 2d 50 La. 1964
Bryant v. Johnson, La.App., ; , ; Duhon v. Harkins, La.App., ; Breaux v. Valin, La.App., ; Rizley v. Cutrer, 232 La.
Daigle v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Ins. Co. 165 So. 2d 643 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Co., , , our Supreme Court stated: "`In view of these provisions, and since the instant collision occurred while the bakery truck was in the wrong traffic lane, the presumption is that Goudeau was negligent in the operation of his vehicle.
Motors Insurance Corp. v. Marquette Casualty Co. 162 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
the Supreme Court held once it is established a collision occurred while a vehicle is in the wrong lane of traffic, the presumption is that the driver of such vehicle was negligent and the burden of proof is upon him to show the accident was not caused by his negligence.
Belanger v. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. of Wis. 159 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Schick v. Jenevein, 145 La.
Davis v. Roberts 159 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Jones v. Continental Casualty Co. of Chicago 159 So. 2d 5 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
360 ; Noland v. Liberty *8 Mutual Insurance Company, , ; Miller v. Hayes, La.App.
Schaubhut v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. 157 So. 2d 346 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
(1957) and the cases cited therein.
Bailey v. National Surety Corporation 149 So. 2d 669 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Arrow Food Distributors, Inc. v. Thurman 144 So. 2d 398 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
In support of this rule, , ; Territo v. Carter, La.App., ; Hightower v. Dr. Pepper Bottling Co. of Shreveport, La.App., ; and Carhee v. Scott, La.App., .
Coody v. Nicholson 142 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Fullilove v. United States Casualty Company of New York, La.
Bryant v. Johnson 140 So. 2d 758 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1962
C; Hightower v. Dr. Pepper Bottling Company of Shreveport, La.App., (2d Cir., 1959); , (1957).
Breaux v. Valin 138 So. 2d 405 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
Co., , ; Carhee v. *407 Scott, La.App.
Service Fire Insurance Company v. Johnson 138 So. 2d 410 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
Co., , ; Carhee v. Scott, La.App.
Wilson v. Kelly 138 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1962
Co., , (1957); Hunter v. Bedsole and Shetley (La.App.
Daniel v. Reed 137 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Co., , ; and Schick v. Jenevein, 145 La.
Fullilove v. US Casualty Company of New York 129 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
the Supreme Court, with respect to the very issue herein presented, declared, after quoting the sections of the statute hereinabove cited: "In view of these provisions, and since the instant collision occurred while the bakery truck was in the wrong traffic lane, the presumption is that Goudeau w
Robards v. American Automobile Insurance Co. 128 So. 2d 44 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
He stated that to apply the strict rule contained in the case of Monteleone v. Dularge Packing Co., La.App., , , to the effect that a driver must see objects within the vision of his headlights a distance of 200 feet, he would undoubtedly have to convict Robards of negligence.
Thibodeaux v. Gore 124 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
2d 386 ; Noland v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 1957, , .
Hidalgo v. Dupuy 122 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Co., , ; Guidry v. Crowther, La.App., 1 Cir., ; Crowther v. Fenstermaker, La.App., 1 Cir., ; Brock v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas.
Hightower v. Dr. Pepper Bottling Co. of Shreveport 117 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1960
360 ; Miller v. Hayes, La.App., 1947, ; Noland v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 1957, , .
Henderson v. Shewbart 112 So. 2d 727 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
Soileau v. Manuel 109 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1959
360 ; , ; Rizley v. Cutrer, 232 La.