Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Gray v. State Ex Rel. Department of Highways, 202 So. 2d 24.

23 citing documents.

Seth Guidry v. Entergy Services, Inc.; Entergy Louisiana, LLC; And Xylem, Inc. of Virginia La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
This court cited Gray v. State, Dep’t of Highways, (1967), which held that when an owner of land is aware his property is being appropriated for public use and takes no action to prevent it, he cannot later complain.
Nga 911, LLC v. Orleans Parish Communication District La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
So.2d 24 (1967) (landowners, although aware that their property was being appropriated for borrow pit purposes, did not seek to enjoin the entry onto their land and the removal of dirt, but filed suit only two days before the job was completed, and the court denied damages for trespass, li
Angela D. v. West Jefferson Levee District 235 So. 3d 1230 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2017
(1967), the Louisiana Supreme Court considered landowners’ claims for damages ex delicto against the Louisiana Department of Highways for the taking under the supplemental expropriation held invalid in Bordages, supra.
Sid-Mar's Restaurant & Lounge, Inc. v. State ex rel. Governor 182 So. 3d 390 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
For example, general damages were not allowed when the taker was found to have made an inverse condemnation of the plaintiffs land through a “good faith error” in an expropriation proceeding ( , ).
RAMELLI GROUP v. City of New Orleans 997 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
G.D. Womack Trenching, Inc. v. Maitland Water System, Inc. 870 So. 2d 579 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
(1967) (landowners, although aware that their property was being appropriated for borrow pit purposes, did not seek to enjoin the entry onto their land and the removal of dirt, but filed suit only two days before the job was completed, and the court denied | fidamages for trespass, limiting recovery to
G. D. Womack Trenching, Inc. v. Maitland Water System, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
So.2d 24 (1967) (landowners, although aware that their property was being appropriated for borrow pit purposes, did not seek to enjoin the entry onto their land and the removal of dirt, but filed suit only two days before the job was completed, and the court denied damages for trespass, li
Lillian E. Landaiche Roy v. Sheriff Bill Belt La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Gray v. State Through Dep’t of Highways, So.2d 24 (La.
Roy v. Belt 868 So. 2d 209 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Carbo v. City of Slidell 844 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
1073 , (1972); Gray v. State, Dep't of Highways, , (1967).
Williams v. City of Baton Rouge 731 So. 2d 240 La. 1999
The City/ , (1967), the plaintiffs are limited to an inverse condemnation action, and are not entitled to any damages under general tort law.
Distinguished Williams v. City of Baton Rouge 715 So. 2d 15 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
of Highways, , (1967), is misplaced, as the facts of that case are clearly distinguishable from those encountered here.
Simmons v. BOARD OF COM'RS, BOSSIER LEVEE DISTRICT 624 So. 2d 935 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967); State, through Dept. of Transp.
Mathis v. City of DeRidder 599 So. 2d 378 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
A Supreme Court case directly on point is Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967).
Airline Const. v. Ascension Parish School Board 568 So. 2d 1029 La. 1990
(1967) (landowners, although aware that their property was being appropriated for borrow pit purposes, did not seek to enjoin the entry onto their land and the removal of dirt, but filed suit only two days before the job was completed, and the court denied damages for trespass, limiting recovery to just
Dickie's Sportsman's Centers, Inc. v. DEPT. OF TRANSP. AND DEV. 477 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
425 , (1970); Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967); Key v. Louisiana, Dept. of Highways, (La.App.
Rester v. Gravity Drainage Board No. II 473 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
In Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967), the Louisiana Supreme Court discussed the proper measure of damages in an appropriation case and stated: ..
Matherne v. Terrebonne Parish Police Jury 462 So. 2d 274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Further, in Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967), the removal of 120,000 cubic yards of dirt took place from an unexpropriated portion of land.
Pearce v. LJ Earnest, Inc. 411 So. 2d 1276 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Defendant DOTD asserts that the plaintiffs should be estopped from asserting tortious appropriations inasmuch as they failed to minimize damages by seeking injunctive relief, citing in support of their proposition: Gray v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Highways, , (1967).
Girouard v. Louviere 361 So. 2d 1306 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
280 (1887); and Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967).
Istre v. South Central Bell Telephone Co. 329 So. 2d 486 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
926 , (1960); Gray v. State of Louisiana, Through the Department of Highways et al., , (1967).
Weber v. McMillan 285 So. 2d 349 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Gray v. State, Department of Highways, , (1967); Humphreys v. Bennett Oil Corp., 195 La.
Department of Highways v. Clemmons 209 So. 2d 18 La. 1968
The factual and procedural background leading up to the judgment sought to be enforced is fully detailed in our decision in Gray et al. v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Highways et al., , .