Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Lomenick v. Schoeffler, 200 So. 2d 127.

303 citing documents.

Barrois v. Service Drayage Company 250 So. 2d 135 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1971
(1967), set forth the guiding role for appellate review of the award of judge or jury as to quantum.
Abadie v. Employers Group Insurance Co. 250 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
963 , (1964), , (1967), the Court stated: “From these decisions, two principles emerge: (1) To modify the amount of an award for general damages, an appellate court must find that the trial judge or jury has abused the 'much discretion’ accorded by the codal provision; (2) The awards in other cases serve only as an ai
Dykes v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 248 So. 2d 603 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Fauntlory v. Travelers Indemnity Co. 248 So. 2d 836 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
963 , (1964) ; , (1967).
Carr v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 248 So. 2d 917 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Sylvester v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 247 So. 2d 395 La. 1971
Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Ebert v. Macaluso 248 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
(1967); Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Boudreaux v. Altex Ready Mixed Concrete Corp. 246 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Miller v. Thomas 246 So. 2d 16 La. 1971
963 , 169 * (1964) ; , (1967).
Courtney v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. 246 So. 2d 232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
art. 1934(3); , (1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Fackrell v. Gulley 246 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
(1967) ; Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Robicheaux v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. 245 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
McCallum v. State, Department of Highways 246 So. 2d 46 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
Brown v. Hawkins 244 So. 2d 896 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Lovett v. Continental Insurance Co. 249 So. 2d 581 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
the Supreme Court said: “We recognize that in cases of this type the Constitution makes it the duty of appellate court to review both the law and the facts, but in their examination of the facts these courts must give effect to the basic law set out in Article 1934(3) of our Civil Code that in the as
Luttrell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 244 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
(1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Co., 246 La.
Gurley v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Underwriters, Inc. 242 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
(1967) and Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Floyd v. City of New Orleans 242 So. 2d 332 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Later, , (1967) rejected the categorization of whiplash injuries and required the Court to consider the specific symptoms of pain and discomfort, their severity, effect, and duration.
Williams v. FW Woolworth Co. 242 So. 2d 16 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
(1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Herbert v. Travelers Indemnity Company 239 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
(1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Koder v. Phoenix Insurance Co. 241 So. 2d 257 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
art. 1934(3); , (1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Pepper v. Glover 241 So. 2d 269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
art. 1934(3); , (1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Pichauffe v. Naquin 241 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
the Supreme Court of Louisiana, said: "We recognize that in cases of this type the Constitution makes it the duty of appellate courts to review both the law and the facts, but in their examination of the fact these courts must give effect to the basic law set out in Article 1934(3) of our Civil Code
Murphy v. Piro 240 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
Sylvester v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company 237 So. 2d 431 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
and cases cited therein; (La.App.
Higgins v. Gaule 237 So. 2d 902 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Herndon v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 237 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1970
Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 237 So. 2d 690 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
Guthrie v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana 238 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
(1967); Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Guillory v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 236 So. 2d 876 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Civil Code Article 1934; , .
Adamson v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation 236 So. 2d 556 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
Mathews v. Allstate Insurance 235 So. 2d 440 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
at 132 (1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company, 246 La.
Hathorn v. McKay 236 So. 2d 74 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
259 , , Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Hutchins v. Westley 235 So. 2d 434 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
(1967); Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Harrell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 234 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
LSA-Civil Code Art. 1934(3); , , in which the Supreme Court said: “We recognize that in cases of this type the Constitution makes it the duty of appellate courts to review both the law and the facts, but in their examination of the facts these courts must give effect to the basic law set out in Article 1934 (3) of our Civil Code tha
Gant v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 234 So. 2d 776 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
It is clear that an award of damages made by the trial court will not be disturbed unless it amounts to a clear abuse of the great discretion vested therein, Louisiana Civil Code Article 1934(3); , (1967) ; Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Nebraska, 246 La.
Miller v. Weaver 234 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1970
We are fully cognizant of the jurisprudential guidelines set forth by the Supreme Court in several recent decisions, , (1967) ; Ballard v. National Indemnity Company, 246 La.
Scruggs v. McCraney 234 So. 2d 262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Lang v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc. 230 So. 2d 383 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
(1967): "We recognize that in cases of this type the Constitution makes it the duty of appellate courts to review both the law and the facts, but in their examination of the fact these courts must give effect to the basic law set out in Article 1934 (3) of our Civil Code that in the assessment of damag
Sylvester v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 234 So. 2d 754 La. 1970
2d 64 , , , on the other hand, as representing the “much discretion in the *1112 trier of facts in each individual case” principle, without regard to other awards.
Commnita v. Jurisich 232 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
(1968); Lomenick v. Schoeffler, Cadillac, , (1967); Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Tewis v. Zurich Insurance 233 So. 2d 357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
art. 1934(3); , (1967); Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Meyers ex rel. Meyers v. Jefferson Parish School Board 233 So. 2d 702 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
. , (1967); Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Poche v. Frazier 232 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
art. 1934(3); , , and that we should not disturb the jury's award *861 of general damages for personal injuries in the absence of a clear abuse of that discretion.
Soileau v. Continental Insurance Company 228 So. 2d 522 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
Of course, , (1967) and Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Heider v. Employers Mutual Liability Ins. Co. of Wis. 231 So. 2d 438 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
Barthelemy v. Phoenix Insurance Co., La.App., ; , ; Ballard v. National Indemnity Company of Omaha, Neb., 246 La.
Stoltz v. Continental Insurance Co. 231 So. 2d 443 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
959, (1967), the type of injury has little significance in determining the amount of the award.
Gengo v. Fereday 230 So. 2d 290 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1970
Shephard v. Checker Cab Company 230 So. 2d 343 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
2d 215 ; Hall v. State Through Department of Highways, La.App., ; Desselle v. Wilson, La.App., ; , .
Ardoin v. Travelers Ins. Co. 229 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969