Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Jordan v. Travelers Insurance Company, 245 So. 2d 151.

446 citing documents.

Pagitt Well Service, Inc. v. Sam Broussard, Inc. 293 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
Rey v. Cuccia 298 So. 2d 840 La. 1974
155: "* * * proof by direct or circumstantial evidence is sufficient to constitute a preponderance when, taking the evidence as a whole, such proof shows the fact or causation sought to be proved is more probable than not."
Hartdegen v. Juneau 296 So. 2d 334 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Edwards v. Sims 294 So. 2d 611 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Hanover Insurance Co. v. Jacobson-Young, Inc. 294 So. 2d 564 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Reed v. Meaux 292 So. 2d 557 La. 1974
Hoffman v. All Star Insurance Corp. 288 So. 2d 388 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Fox v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, et al, La., (1973).
Schwegmann Bros. GS Mkts. v. Louisiana Milk Com'n 290 So. 2d 312 La. 1974
Louisiana Power & Light Company v. CHURCHILL FARMS, INC. 292 So. 2d 183 La. 1974
Smolinski v. Taulli 285 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
As stated in the case of Jordan v. Travelers Insurance *580 Company, , (1971): "Where there is legal right to recovery but the damages cannot be exactly estimated, the courts have reasonable discretion to assess same based upon all the facts and circumstances of the case.
Birdwell v. Reliance Insurance Co. 289 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
(1971) is authority for the proposition that where loss of future earnings cannot be proved with mathematical certainty, the court can nevertheless make an award for such earnings where it appears with reasonable certainty that there will be such a loss.
Piper v. Olinde Hardware & Supply Company, Inc. 288 So. 2d 626 La. 1974
Brignac v. Boisdore 288 So. 2d 31 La. 1973
Bewley Furniture Company, , (1971).
Fox v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 288 So. 2d 42 La. 1973
Rachal v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. 286 So. 2d 147 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
Christy v. City of Baton Rouge 282 So. 2d 724 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Stein v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance 287 So. 2d 657 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Stated differently but substantially the same, the Supreme Court, through Associate Justice Albert Tate, , (1971), observed: “In describing this burden of proof, the courts sometimes speak of proof to a ‘reasonable certainty’ or to a ‘legal certainty’ ; or of proof by evidence which is of ‘greater weight’ or ‘more convincing’ than that offered to the contrary; or (in the case of circumstantial evidence
Spillers v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc. 282 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1973
Bewley Furniture Co., Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co. 285 So. 2d 216 La. 1973
(1971): "Similarly, when (as here) both parties apply for review, this court's denial of the application of one constitutes its final determination upon the matters included therein.
Gulotta v. Cutshaw 283 So. 2d 482 La. 1973
Thomas v. Chatman 282 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
(1971), which stated: "In describing this burden of proof, the courts sometime speak of proof to a `reasonable certainty' or to a `legal certainty'; or of proof by evidence which is of `greater weight' or `more convincing' than that offered to the contrary; or (in the case of circumstantial eviden
Stablier v. Partin 278 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Spiers v. Lane 278 So. 2d 549 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
New Orleans Shrimp Co., Inc. v. DUPLANTIS TRUCK L., INC. 283 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
176 , (1954); , (1971); Peoples Moss Gin Co., (3rd La.App.1972).
Britt v. Bowler 278 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Hughes v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., (Ct. of App. 4th Cir. 1969).
Webb v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 278 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Carpenter v. National Food Stores of Louisiana, Inc. 278 So. 2d 570 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Jordan v. Gulf Insurance 276 So. 2d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
* * Counsel for plaintiff filed a motion for a , (1971).
Smolinski v. Taulli 276 So. 2d 286 La. 1973
989 , (1971); , (1971); Pierre v. Allstate Insurance Co., 257 La.
Thibodeaux v. St. Joseph Hospital 276 So. 2d 703 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Bailey v. Moore 276 So. 2d 708 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Ehrhard v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 274 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
(1971), the Louisiana Supreme Court summarized several judicial formulations on the burden of proof and concluded by stating: "* * * Whatever the descriptive term used, however, proof by direct or circumstantial evidence is sufficient to constitute a preponderance, when, taking the evidence as a whole
Vonner v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF PUBLIC WELFARE 273 So. 2d 252 La. 1973
Co., , (1971), Perkins v. Texas and New Orleans Railroad Co., 243 La.
Berry v. Travelers Insurance Co. 273 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Co., , (1971).” (Emphasis theirs) [ ].
Fox v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 273 So. 2d 743 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
(1971), and particularly to the following language which appears at p. 154: “[5] Other intermediate decisions likewise hold, correctly, that a claim for loss of earnings need not be proved with mathematical certainty, but only by such proof as reasonably establishes the claim.
Peoples Moss Gin Co., Inc. v. Jenkins 270 So. 2d 285 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1972
Irby Steel v. W. R. Fairchild Construction Co. 270 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
1st Cir. 1960), certiorari denied.” ( , [1971]) We do find merit in plaintiff subcontractor’s contention that the trial judge manifestly erred in his determination of the amount of equipment idled as a result of the subcontractor’s breach.
Boudreaux v. American Insurance Company 264 So. 2d 621 La. 1972
As the majority notes, , (1971), as follows: “In describing this burden of proof, the courts sometimes speak’ of proof to a ‘reasonable certainty’ or to a ‘legal certainty’;.
Francis v. Lake Charles American Press 265 So. 2d 206 La. 1972
(1971), we distinctly said: "Further, at the time a writ of certiorari is granted, this court may itself restrict its subsequent review.
Otillio v. Scopes 265 So. 2d 319 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Supportive of our position is the Supreme Court’s , 155 (1971) which states: “[5] Other intermediate decisions likewise hold, correctly, that a claim for loss of earnings need not be proved with mathematical certainty, but only by such proof .as reasonably establishes the claim.
Succession of Chauvin 257 So. 2d 422 La. 1972
Riley v. Frantz 253 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1971
Roberie v. Sinclair Refining Company 252 So. 2d 488 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
Co., , , we conclude that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in making this award.
Nuccio v. Fireman's Fund American Insurance Companies 250 So. 2d 802 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Of these cases, the three (3) , (1971), increasing the award made by the Court of Appeal, First Circuit in (1970).
Weber v. Fidelity & Casualty Insurance Co. of NY 250 So. 2d 754 La. 1971
(1971); Naquin v. Marquette Cas.
Marcotte v. Travelers Insurance Company 249 So. 2d 105 La. 1971

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by