Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Cartwright v. Firemen's Ins. Co. of Newark, NJ, 223 So. 2d 822.

24 citing documents.

Wiley v. Safeway Ins. Co. 745 So. 2d 636 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
Co. of Newark, New Jersey, , (1969); Littleton v. Arrow Food Distributor, Inc., (La.App.
Dawson v. Clark 564 So. 2d 1291 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
They argue, in reliance on Cartwright v. Freeman’s Insurance Company of Newark, N.J., , (1969), that the provisions of said Act do not affect principles relating to civil liability.
King v. Louviere 543 So. 2d 1327 La. 1989
Co., , (4th Cir.1971); (4th Cir.1977); (3rd Cir.1971).
Streeter v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., Inc. 533 So. 2d 54 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
3 Cir.1968), affirmed, , (1969).
Brannon v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. 507 So. 2d 194 La. 1987
In discussing the propriety of the jury instructions, we referred to Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Co. of Newark, N.J., , (1969), a latent brake defect case, and quoted at 1334 from the Third Circuit Court of Appeal opinion in that case: "`[H]owever, for latent defects to constitute a valid defense, the proof must be exceptionally strong so as to satisfy certain jurisprudential requirements.'" We also made reference to th
Stablier v. City of Baton Rouge 393 So. 2d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Co. of Newark, N. J., , (1969), involving an accident caused by defective brakes, the Supreme Court rejected the strict liability doctrine under art. 2317.
Smith v. Crown Zellerbach Corp. 385 So. 2d 307 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Co. of Newark, , (1969).
Arceneaux v. Domingue 365 So. 2d 1330 La. 1978
Not since Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Co. of Newark, New Jersey, , (1969), has this court had occasion to examine the "latent defect" defense in rear end collision cases.
Loescher v. Parr 324 So. 2d 441 La. 1975
(1969) is inconsistent with the earlier jurisprudence interpreting Articles 2320 and 2322, cited above, and with the later jurisprudence interpreting Articles 2318 and 2321, also cited above (as well as with the interpretations by other civilian jurisdictions of comparable provisions of their civil cod
Distinguished Sers v. South Central Bell Telephone Company 304 So. 2d 760 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
3 Cir. 1970); Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark, N.J., , (1969); (La.App.
Liuzza v. Lombard 284 So. 2d 88 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
In the case of Cartwright v. Firemen’s Insurance Company, , , the Supreme Court held that an automobile owner is not liable for damages caused by a defect in the vehicle where he had no reasonable means of discovering such defect and used every precaution to maintain the machine in safe condition.
Simon v. Ford Motor Company 282 So. 2d 126 La. 1973
See Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark, N. J., , (1969).
McGuinness v. United Services Automobile Ass'n 275 So. 2d 485 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
In Cartwright v. Firemen’s Insurance Co. of Newark, N. J., , , the Supreme Court of Louisiana *488 had under consideration whether an automobile owner, without fault, is liable for damages resulting from a latent defect in his vehicle.
Theriot v. Transit Casualty Co. 267 So. 2d 211 La. 1972
In Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, , , this court said that although Article 2317 made one responsible for damage occasioned by "the things which we have in our control", that article was modified by Articles 2315 and 2316.
Ryan v. Rawls 260 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1972
Citing Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, , (1969), as holding there is no liability on the part of a motorist where the facts show the accident was due to brake failure which could not reasonably have been discovered or anticipated by the motorist, the court found defendant was not negligent in not having discovered or anticipated the brake fai
Wishom v. Ford Motor Company 256 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
3 Cir. 1968; Affirmed at , )."
Simon v. Ford Motor Co. 256 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
This principle has been well-stated recently by the Supreme Court in Cartwright v. Firemen’s Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, , (1969), and followed by a number of cases since then.
Keck v. Yocum 250 So. 2d 468 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
3rd Cir., 1968), affirmed at , (1969); (La.App.
Dupre v. American Motorists Insurance 246 So. 2d 391 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
affirmed on certiorari in , , and that its rationale is applicable here: ( -24) ‘The issue presented under these facts is whether an automobile owner is strictly and absolutely responsible for damages caused by a defect in his vehicle, regardless of the fact that he had no reasonable means of discovering such defect
Metzger v. Scott 244 So. 2d 671 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1971
That case was decided by the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, based upon the rulings in a prior line of cases culminating in the case of Cartwright v. Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, , *673 (1969); (La.App.
Mallett v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 240 So. 2d 413 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
In Cartwright v. Firemen’s Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, , (1969) our Supreme Court unanimously refused to extend the doctrine of strict liability to cases involving latent brake defects.
Towner v. Milligan 234 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
3 Cir. 1968; Affirmed at , ).
Cartwright v. Chrysler Corp. 232 So. 2d 285 La. 1970
Cartwright v. Chrysler Corporation 232 So. 2d 285 La. 1970