Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Moak v. American Automobile Insurance Company, 134 So. 2d 911.

79 citing documents.

Steven O. Richard v. Fred Taylor La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Richard v. Taylor 179 So. 3d 975 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Holloway Drilling Equipment, Inc. v. Danielle Bodin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Co., So.2d 911 (1961); see Brown, 630 So.2d at 749 n. 11.
Holloway Drilling Equipment, Inc. v. Bodin 107 So. 3d 699 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Co., , (1961); see Brown, 630 So.2d at 749 n. 11.
Delesdernier v. Delesdernier 95 So. 3d 588 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Chadwick F. Montgomery v. Russell Lee Montgomery, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 6/30/02), So.2d 911 (1961).
Montgomery v. Montgomery 87 So. 3d 376 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
App. 4 Cir. 6/30/02), , , (1961).
Edward Signal, Jr. v. Jared Romero La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
One of the first cases to hold that a So.2d 911 (1961).
SIGNAL v. Romero 32 So. 3d 1126 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
One of the first cases to hold that a , (1961).
In Re Succession of Koch 24 So. 3d 1031 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Chalmette Retail Center, L.L.C. v. Lafayette Insurance Co. 21 So. 3d 485 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., , (1961), the Louisiana courts have crafted a jurisprudential exception to this rule; under this exception, applicable only to compromise instruments, when the scope of a compromise is at issue, extrinsic evidence can be considered to determine exactly what differences the parties intended to settle.
Jonnie Buford v. Leah Blanchard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Buford v. Blanchard 19 So. 3d 1255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Hines v. Smith 16 So. 3d 1234 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Tyler v. Roger 11 So. 3d 1243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Hymel v. Eagle, Inc. 7 So. 3d 1249 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
Co., , (1961), cited by the plaintiff, involved a collision between an automobile in which Mrs. Moak, the plaintiff, was a passenger, and a train.
Donna Tyson v. Thompson Home Health La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
4 Cir. 1/30/02), So.2d 911 (1961).
Tyson v. Thompson Home Health 3 So. 3d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
4 Cir. 1/30/02), , , (1961).
Maria Guadalupe Reyes-Ramirez v. Progressive Security Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Further, while an exception has been developed jurisprudentially which allows the consideration of extrinsic evidence when the scope of the compromise agreement is at issue, So.2d 911 4 (1961), Plaintiffs cannot avail themselves of this exception because their counsel did not attend the hearing on the exception of res judicata and introduce evidence.
REYES-RAMIREZ v. Progressive SEC. Ins. Co. 996 So. 2d 1213 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Further, while an exception has been developed jurisprudentially which allows the consideration of extrinsic evidence when the scope of the compromise agreement is at issue, , (1961), Plaintiffs cannot avail themselves of this exception because their counsel did not attend the hearing on the exception of res judicata and introduce evidence.
Sims v. BFI WASTE SERVICES, LLC 964 So. 2d 998 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Co., , the Louisiana supreme court held that when a dispute arises as to the scope of a compromise agreement, extrinsic evidence can be considered to determine exactly what differences the parties intended to settle.
Drapcho v. Drapcho 928 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
John David Moore v. Estelle Martin Moore La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Moak [v. American Automobile Insurance Co., So.2d 911 (1961)] stands for the proposition that when a dispute arises as to the scope of a compromise agreement, extrinsic evidence can be considered to determine exactly what differences the parties intended to settle.
Moore v. Moore 920 So. 2d 297 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Moak [v. American Automobile Insurance Co., , (1961) ] stands for the proposition that when a dispute arises as to the scope of a compromise agreement, extrinsic evidence can be considered to determine exactly what differences the parties intended to settle.
Carrie v. LOUISIANA FARM BUREAU CAS. INS. 900 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
App. 4 Cir. 1/30/02), , , (1961).
Randall v. Martin 868 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
4 Cir. 6/30/02) , , , (1961).
Dimitri v. Dimitri 809 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Gaubert v. Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc. 770 So. 2d 879 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Dumas v. Angus Chemical Co. 742 So. 2d 655 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Co., , (1961); Cutrer v. Illinois Cent.
Chabaud v. Sylvester 722 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
Ortego v. STATE, DOTD 689 So. 2d 1358 La. 1997
Co., , (1961); see Brown, 630 So.2d at 749 n. 11.
EM Nominee Partnership Co. v. Arkla Energy Resources 656 So. 2d 55 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
Brown v. Drillers, Inc. 630 So. 2d 741 La. 1994
Duet v. Lucky 621 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
Pat O'Brien's Bar, Inc. v. Franco's Cocktail Prod., Inc. 615 So. 2d 429 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
art. 3079; , (1961); Munna v. Mangano, supra ."
Brown v. Simoneaux 593 So. 2d 939 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
NOTES [1] , (1961) (La.Ct.App.
Tarver v. Oliver H. Van Horn Co., Inc. 591 So. 2d 1366 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
art. 3079; , (1961); Munna v. Mangano, supra .
Aldredge v. Whitney 591 So. 2d 1201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Art. 3079; Smith, supra ; , (1961); (La.App.
Shaw v. Scott 585 So. 2d 623 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Cutrer v. Illinois Cent. Gulf R. Co. 581 So. 2d 1013 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Art. 1949; Nook[Moak] v. American Automobile Insurance Company, , (1961); McDonald v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad [ ] [sic] (La.App.
Barnhill v. Consol. Med., Disability & Life Trust 569 So. 2d 1115 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
art. 3079; , (1961); (La.App.
Shepherd v. Allstate Ins. Co. 562 So. 2d 1099 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
NOTES [1] Ms. Shepherd relies on Wise, supra, , (1961) (La.App.
Sanders v. Collins 551 So. 2d 644 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
art. 3079; , (1961); (La.App.
Higgins v. Spencer 531 So. 2d 768 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Distinguished Boudreaux v. LeBlanc 517 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
For instance, , (1961), the plaintiffs were paid $242.00, in connection with a release, for the destruction of contents to their car which occurred in a collision with a train.
Schmidt v. Doe 514 So. 2d 614 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Ellison v. Michelli 513 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
art. 3073; , (1961); Thompson v. Bank of New Orleans, Etc., supra.
Campbell v. Roman Catholic Church 490 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
(1961), the court rescinded the compromise agreement because plaintiff proved that she did not intend to release the defendant from her claim for personal injuries.
Sauerwin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 490 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
art. 3079; , (1961); (La.App.
Sauerwin v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. CO. 490 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
art. 3079; , (1961); (La.App.