DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., 256 So. 2d 105.

154 citing documents.

  • State Ex Rel. Plaquemines Parish Sch. Bd. v. Plaquemines Parish Government 690 So. 2d 232 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
  • Stroik v. Ponseti 683 So. 2d 1342 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp.
  • Cameron Parish School Bd. v. Acands, Inc. 687 So. 2d 84 La. 1997
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971); see also Twin Parish Port Comm'n v. Berry Bros., Inc., 94-2594 (La.2/20/95), (when a statute is declared unconstitutional, this court's jurisdiction extends to *88 all issues, constitutional or otherwise, involved in the civil action before it); compare Rivet, Et Al. v. State, DOT
  • Kiefer v. Southern Freightways, Inc. 686 So. 2d 1041 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
  • Louisiana Land and Exploration Co. v. Verdin 681 So. 2d 63 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University 673 So. 2d 585 La. 1996
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971).
  • Edwards v. Horstman 672 So. 2d 222 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • Sattar v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. 671 So. 2d 550 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    The Supreme Court explained the "law of the case" : With regard to an appellate court, the `law of the case' refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the same case.
  • Sanders v. Posi-Seal International 668 So. 2d 742 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • Greater No Car Dealers Ass'n v. La. Tax Com'n 663 So. 2d 797 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
    Metal Corp., , (1971); Petition of Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans
  • Pitre v. Louisiana Tech University 655 So. 2d 659 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971); Petition of Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, (emphasis added).
  • Trahan v. McManus 653 So. 2d 89 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
    *94 Metal Corp., , (1971) (emphasis added) (notes omitted).
  • Cree Oil Co. v. Home Ins. Co. 653 So. 2d 620 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
  • Morris v. People's Bank & Trust Co. of Natchitoches 642 So. 2d 225 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    Sloane, supra .; Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971).
  • In re M.W. 641 So. 2d 582 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , Brumfield v. Dyson, supra at 22.
  • In Re MW 641 So. 2d 582 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , Brumfield v. Dyson, supra at 22.
  • Futrell v. Scott Truck and Tractor Co. 629 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    See, Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971).
  • Dodson v. Community Blood Center 633 So. 2d 252 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
  • Sloane v. Davis 619 So. 2d 585 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971).
  • Burns v. Sabine River Authority 614 So. 2d 1337 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
  • Hae Woo Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp. 605 So. 2d 187 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
    Metal Corp., , (1971): With regard to an appellate court, the `law of the case' refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the *194 same case.
  • Wainwright v. Moreno's, Inc. 602 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp.
  • Garner v. Pool Co. of Texas 595 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , , 107 n. 1 (1971).
  • BOARD OF LEVEE COM'RS v. Newport Ltd. 578 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
    Gay v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., Petition of Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans
  • Hampton v. Rubicon Chemicals, Inc. 579 So. 2d 458 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    The case cited by Fireman's Fund, , (1971), is inapposite.
  • Home Savings & Loan Ass'n v. McCuin 557 So. 2d 290 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1972).
  • State v. Junior 542 So. 2d 23 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
  • Moncrief v. Panepinto 540 So. 2d 1304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    The applicable principles for reconsideration of prior interlocutory rulings in the same case are “the law of the case.” In Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., the court stated: With regard to an appellate court, the “law of the case” refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the same case.
  • Neff v. Rose 546 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
    Under Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971), the law of the case principal applies where, as here, a prior ruling reflects prior adjudication by us of an issue involving the same parties who thus had their day in court.
  • First Federal Sav. & Loan of Warner Robins, Georgia v. Disiere 542 So. 2d 11 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
    4th Cir.1988), , (1971).
  • Bouzon v. Bouzon 527 So. 2d 357 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corporation, (La.
  • Robertson v. POPEYE'S FAMOUS FRIED CHICKEN, INC. 524 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
  • O'Neill v. Galatas 522 So. 2d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    Metal Corp., , (1971): *668 “With regard to an appellate court, the ‘law of the case’ refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the same case.1 This policy applies only against those who were parties to the case when the former appellate decision was rend
  • Henry v. Ford Motor Co., Inc. 519 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
    Under Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., this Court's decision on the writ constitutes the "law-of-the-case" and is binding on those "...
  • Walker v. Creech 509 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    the first 3 of the 4 alleged specifications of error in the present appeal have already been addressed by this Court and the Louisiana Supreme Court and thus represent “the law of the case.” The late Justice Albert Tate, Jr., speaking for the Court in Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp., , (1971), stated the “law of the case” principle as follows: With regard to an appellate court, the “law of the case” refers to a policy by which the court mil not, on a subsequent appeal, r
  • Cantrell v. BASF Wyandotte Corp. 489 So. 2d 1062 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Schwarz v. Bourgeois 459 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • Freeman v. Insurance Co. of North America 444 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
    See Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp.
  • Brumfield v. Dyson 418 So. 2d 21 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    (1971): "With regard to an appellate court, the `law of the case' refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the same case.
  • Guaranty Sav. Assur. Co. v. NATIONAL AM. BK. 407 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
  • AM. EMPLOYERS INS. CO. v. Honeycutt Furniture Co. 390 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
    (1971), rehearing denied: "With regard to an appellate court, the `law of the case' refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the same case.
  • Carleton v. Division of Administration 388 So. 2d 709 La. 1980
    This Court denied writs but as we later stated in the second case involving this matter, , such denial did not constitute an adjudication in this Court on the merits of the legal issue.
  • Danos v. St. Pierre 383 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    1978); see Day, et al. v. Campbell Grosjean Roofing and Sheet Metal Corporation, et al., , (1971).
  • Smith v. Division of Administration 362 So. 2d 1101 La. 1978
    [3] See Day et al v. Campbell Grosjean Roofing and Sheet Metal Corporation, et al , (1971).
  • Arnold v. Board of Levee Commissioners 359 So. 2d 748 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    “See: Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & S. M. Corp., , (1971); Louisiana State Bar Assn. v. Theard, 225 La.
  • Derbofen v. TL James & Co., Inc. 355 So. 2d 963 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheetmetal Corp.
  • Bowles & Edens Co. v. H & H Sewer Systems, Inc. 346 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    In regard to the key issue before us, Justice Tate, , , where the same question was litigated, stated the following: “With regard to an appellate court, the ‘law of the case’ refers to a policy by which the court will not, on a subsequent appeal, reconsider prior rulings in the same case.
  • Marmolejo v. Fairmont Roosevelt Hotel Co. 337 So. 2d 607 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    M. Corp., 1971, , ), we decline to reconsider our prior ruling.
  • Holland v. Buckley 305 So. 2d 113 La. 1974
    (1972), and the cases cited therein.
  • Succession of Killingsworth 292 So. 2d 536 La. 1974