Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ruthardt v. Tennant, 215 So. 2d 805.

46 citing documents.

Katie Queyrouze Versus John M. Fisse, Federal Express Corporation and Protective Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2021
To let in evidence of conviction of a traffic violation to prove negligence and responsibility in a civil case would unduly erode the rule against hearsay.” 21-CA-54 6 –48; (1968).
Watson v. Smith 247 So. 3d 811 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
See Ruthardt v. Tennant , ,1047-48, , 808 (La.
Joshua Thompson v. Boyce G. Cagle La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Dwight Johnson v. Jonathan Smith La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Johnson v. Smith 86 So. 3d 874 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Domingo v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 54 So. 3d 74 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Sterling v. Allstate Insurance Co. 35 So. 3d 355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
4 *359 Cir. 1/18/06), (-55 , ).
GOHRES v. Dryer 29 So. 3d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Brown v. Unknown Driver 925 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Marilyn Maricle v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Maricle v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. 898 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
Aupied v. Joudeh 694 So. 2d 1012 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Niven v. Boston Old Colony Insurance Company, et al., 94-348 (La.App.
Davis v. Puryear 673 So. 2d 1298 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Niven v. Boston Old Colony Ins. Co. 646 So. 2d 1108 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
(1968), i.e., that the driver of the leased vehicle was on a mission for the owner or that the lessor/owner was himself negligent in allowing the lessee to use the vehicle, are not applicable herein.
Dennis v. Allstate Ins. Co. 645 So. 2d 763 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
Breaux v. Claudel 640 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
(1968), i.e., the driver of the leased vehicle was on a mission for the owner or that the lessor/owner was himself negligent in allowing the lessee to use the vehicle, are not applicable herein.
Bond v. Allemand 632 So. 2d 326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
Coley v. State, Through DOTD 621 So. 2d 41 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
Delaney v. Agency Rent-A-Car, Inc. 616 So. 2d 869 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
[1] , (1968), i.e., the driver of the leased vehicle was on a mission for the owner or that the lessor/owner was himself negligent in allowing the lessee to use the vehicle, are not applicable herein.
Segura v. Andries 610 So. 2d 188 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
4 Cir.1986)] supra; , (1968).
Miller v. Leonard 588 So. 2d 79 La. 1991
32:122; [7] , (1968); Washington *82 Fire & Marine Ins.
Hoffman v. Schwegmann Giant Super Markets 572 So. 2d 825 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
Bastrop State Bank v. Levy, 106 La.
Phipps v. Chesson 570 So. 2d 470 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
Dickerson v. Boom, Inc., supra ; Friday v. Mutz, supra ; , (1968).
Brown v. City of New Orleans 560 So. 2d 983 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
Criticized Dickerson v. Boom, Inc. 532 So. 2d 814 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Levens v. Commercial Union Insurance Companies 529 So. 2d 871 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
164 (La.1901) , which state as follows: [W]hen a defendant in a civil case can by his own testimony throw light upon matters at issue, necessary to his defense and peculiarly within his own knowledge, and fails to go upon the witness stand, the presumption is raised, and will be given effect, that the facts
Merchants Trust & Savings Bank v. Olano 512 So. 2d 1218 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
5 Cir.1983); see also, , (1968).
Succession of Montgomery 506 So. 2d 1309 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
Kyle v. City of Bogalusa 506 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
LeBlanc v. Barras 504 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Friday v. Mutz 483 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
McCann v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 483 So. 2d 205 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
(1968) as support for their contention.
Elliott v. Merritt 457 So. 2d 1216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Dunckelman v. T. Baker Smith & Sons 447 So. 2d 26 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Davis v. Myers 427 So. 2d 648 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
Wolinski v. Fleming 405 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Franklin Printing Co. v. SCOTT FENCE, ETC. 392 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
Williams v. Sharlow 388 So. 2d 809 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
(1968); Umbehagen v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
State v. Bradley 360 So. 2d 858 La. 1978
(1968); Pugh, Work of Appellate Courts, Evidence, 28 La.L.Rev.
B. Segall Company, Inc. v. Trahan 290 So. 2d 854 La. 1974
(1968) at 810 is also applicable to this case: "* * * For it has long been the rule in this State that when a defendant in a civil case can by his own testimony throw light upon matters at issue, necessary to his defense and peculiarly within his own knowledge, and fails to go upon the witness stand, t
Duplechien v. McNabb 260 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1972
(1968) the Supreme Court held: "[3] In civil cases it is inadmissible to show that one or the other of the parties was charged by the police with a traffic violation or convicted.
Mathieu v. Williams 255 So. 2d 151 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
(1968), wherein Mr. Justice Summers, as organ of the court and author of the opinion, stated: "Another circumstance supporting our conclusion that Tennant was negligent is his failure to testify at the trial and explain his conduct or otherwise speak in mitigation of his negligence.
Smith v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 244 So. 2d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
32:104A; , ; Brantley v. Clarkson, 217 La.
Robinson v. Melton Truck Lines, Inc. 244 So. 2d 705 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Farris v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 242 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
said in citing Home Gas and Fuel Company v. Mississippi Tank Company, 246 La.
Kinchen v. Hansbrough 231 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970