Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Herbert v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 232 So. 2d 463.

37 citing documents.

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. ex rel. Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. v. Carter 59 So. 3d 1282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Prejean v. Guillory 28 So. 3d 1174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Our Supreme Court, , stated, “[t]he law favors a prompt disposition of cases for the benefit of litigants who have had their day in the trial court.
Kathy Prejean v. Walter Guillory La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Our Supreme Court, So.2d 463, 464 (La.1970), stated, “[t]he law favors a prompt disposition of cases for the benefit of litigants who have had their day in the trial court.
Louisiana Safety Ass'n v. Courtney Const. 949 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Foley v. Entergy Louisiana, Inc. 946 So. 2d 144 La. 2006
Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 9 (La.11/30/94), ; , (1970); (La.App.
Nichols v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. 933 So. 2d 786 La. 2006
Love v. AAA Temporaries, Inc. 858 So. 2d 410 La. 2003
Campbell v. Melton 817 So. 2d 69 La. 2002
and Develop., 92-2174 (La.2/2293), ; , (1970).
Geiger v. State Ex Rel Dept. of Health 815 So. 2d 80 La. 2002
Co., , (1970) and Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 2164 [8] .
Favaroth v. Appleyard 785 So. 2d 262 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
Robbins v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Labor 728 So. 2d 991 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
MMR-Radon Constructors, Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co. 714 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
(1970); Gentile v. Baton Rouge General Medical Center, 95-0348 (La.
J. Ray McDermott, Inc. v. Morrison 705 So. 2d 195 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
(1970); Gentile v. Baton Rouge General Medical Center, 95-0348 (La.App.
Serie v. Safeway Insurance 702 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Nicholson Management & Consultants, Inc. v. Bergman 681 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Hardy v. A+ Rental Inc. 674 So. 2d 1155 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
White, 613 So.2d at 154 ().
Duncan v. State, Dept. of Transp. and Development 615 So. 2d 305 La. 1993
Webber v. Berry 609 So. 2d 1175 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
White v. West Carroll Hosp., Inc. 613 So. 2d 150 La. 1992
(1970), this court stated that La.Code Civ.P.
Anderson v. Casualty Reciprocal Exchange 602 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
Wascom v. State Farm Ins. Co. 517 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Hester v. Hester 501 So. 2d 910 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Anding v. Anding 480 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
3rd Cir.1976), writ denied, , (1970).
Franklin v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. 483 So. 2d 1033 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Herbert v. Traveler’s Indemnity Co., , (1970); (La.App.
Winn State Bank & Trust Co. v. Browning 453 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
3d Cir.1972), , (1970), (La.App.
MacK v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. 434 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
LaSalle Pump & Supply Co., Inc. v. LOUISIANA MIDLAND R. 433 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
White v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. 416 So. 2d 327 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1982
Jones v. LeDay 373 So. 2d 787 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
Guilott v. Guilott 326 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
Reggio v. Louisiana Gas Service Co. 333 So. 2d 394 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
(1970), the Supreme Court stated that based upon the authority of article 2164 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, an appellate court may remand a case, where the remand is based upon a claim of newly discovered evidence and when such a disposition is just and proper.
LOUISIANA B. & T. CO., CROWLEY v. Roanoke Rice Co-Op. 298 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
2082, 2164, , (1970); (La.App.
KOHLMEYER & COMPANY v. Sobert 286 So. 2d 342 La. 1973
(1970), we refused a remand for new evidence and stated the rule of law as follows: "The law favors a prompt disposition of cases for the benefit of litigants who have had their day in the trial court.
Mid-City Investment Co. v. Batiste 248 So. 2d 88 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Be that as it may, the Supreme Court of Louisiana in Herbert v. Travelers Indemnity Co. (1970) , through *94 Justice Sanders said, that it was an error for an appellate court to remand a case to the lower court for the purpose of taking new evidence without a showing that this new evidence was unobtainable with due diligence for presentation at the original trial.
Summerell v. Phillips 247 So. 2d 542 La. 1971
B. Stern Co. v. Perry 246 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
our Supreme Court said: “The law favors a prompt disposition of cases for the benefit of litigants who have had their day in the trial court.
Herbert v. Travelers Indemnity Company 239 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970