Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., 256 So. 2d 620.

403 citing documents.

William Campbell v. Orient-Express Hotels Louisiana, Inc., Windsor Court Hotel Inc. of Delaware, Windsor Court Hotel, L.L.C., Windsor … La. 2025
App. 5 Cir. 10/31/00), Coblentz 8 See, e.g., Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., (1972) (“Where the rule of law upon which a plaintiff relies for imposing a duty is based upon a statute, the court attempts to interpret legislative intent as to the risk contemplated by the legal duty, which is often a resort to the court’s own judgment of the scope of protection intended by the Legislature.
Catherine Evans, Et Al. v. Abubaker, Inc., Et Al. La. 2024
Determination of the risks encompassed within the duty was also explained in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620 (1972): The same policy considerations which would motivate a legislative body to impose duties to protect from certain risks are applied by the court in making its determination.
Jena Rougeau v. Hospital Service District 2 of Beauregard Parish La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
Todd v. State Through Social Services, 96-3090 (La.9/9/97), Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
c/w 2022-cc-00539 c/w 2022-cc-00730 La. 2023
60, 73 (1956)); Hill v. Lundin & Assocs., Inc.
Officer John Doe, Police Officer v. Deray Mckesson; Black Lives Matter; Black Lives Matter Network, Incorporated La. 2022
2d 656, 660 -61, quoting Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., So.
Christopher Blanchard v. Demetrius J. Hicks La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620, 622 (1972).
Blanchard v. Hicks 244 So. 3d 875 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc. , , , 622 (1972).
Ron Warren, Ind. & O/B/O Estate of Derek Hebert v. Shelter Mutual Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
Hill [v. Lundin & Assocs., Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).]
Warren v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. 196 So. 3d 776 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Hill [v. Lundin & Assocs., Inc., , (1972).]
Richard L. Reynolds v. Robert J. Bordelon III, Robert J. Bordelon Jr., Usagencies Casualty Insurance Company, Automobile Club … La. 2015
This issue is strenuously debated nationally among those states that do recognize the tort because damages are so highly speculative.22 Determining the expected 21
England v. Fifth Louisiana Levee District 167 So. 3d 1105 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
& Dev., 93-0887 (La.1/14/94), , citing Hill v. Lundin & Asso., Inc.
Covington v. Howard 146 So. 3d 933 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
Roberts, supra at 1045; Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Zacher v. Harrah's New Orleans Management Co. 136 So. 3d 132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, , (1972).
Ogea v. Merritt 130 So. 3d 888 La. 2013
of Bernard , as well as black-letter tort law, when examining whether a member of an LLC can be personally liable in tort, the 11sthreshold question to be asked regarding the member is therefore: “Was any duty of care owed to plaintiff (was it a foreseeable risk)?” See 12 William E. Crawford, Louisiana Civil Law Treatise: Tort Law § 4:2 (2d ed.2013), citing Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972), and Dixie Drive It Yourself System New Orleans Co. v. American Beverage Co., 242 La.
Broussard v. State ex rel. Office of State Buildings 113 So. 3d 175 La. 2013
See Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., , (1972) (defendant not insurer against every risk of harm associated with its property).
Sherman Journet v. Clifford Mouton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
471, (1962); Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc. So.2d 620 (1972).
Journet v. Mouton 107 So. 3d 829 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
471 , (1962); Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc. , (1972).
Tracey D. Kulka v. Shag II, Inc. D/B/A the Bulldog Pool Hall" " La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Todd v. State Through Social Services, 96-3090 (La.9/9/97), Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
Kulka v. Shag 100 So. 3d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Todd v. State Through Social Services, 96-3090 (La.9/9/97), ; Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Brodnax v. Foster 92 So. 3d 427 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
Rando, supra; Todd v. State Through Dept. of Social Services, 96-3090 (La.9/9/97), ; Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., , (1972).
Patrick E. Phillips v. G & H Seed Company, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
Patrick E. Phillips v. G & H Seed Company, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
Phillips v. G & H SEED CO. 66 So. 3d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., , (1972).
Dupre & Son Floor Covering, Inc. v. City of Iota La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
See Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
Dupre & Son Floor Covering, Inc. v. City of Iota 36 So. 3d 1117 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
See Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., , (1972).
Williams Ex Rel. Williams v. Jones 34 So. 3d 926 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Lazard v. Foti, 02-2888 at 6, 859 So.2d at 661 , quoting Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Dennis v. Wiley 22 So. 3d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
See Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc.
S. J. v. Lafayette Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
See Hill v. Lundin & Assocs., Inc.
Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc. 16 So. 3d 1065 La. 2009
Todd v. State Through Social Services, 96-3090 (La.9/9/97), ; Hill v. *1093 Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Patrick E. Phillips, Jr. v. G & H Seed Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
Phillips v. G & H Seed Co., Inc. 10 So. 3d 339 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc., , (1972).
J.M., Individually and on Behalf of Her Minor Daughter, A.C. v. Acadia Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
As observed by the Supreme Court in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620 (1972): ....
J.M. v. Acadia Parish School Board 7 So. 3d 150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
As observed by the Supreme Court in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972): [[Image here]] “Cause” in legal cause demands an inquiry into whether a legal standard of care exists and requires delving into policies for and against extending the asserted legal standard of care to protect the particular plaintiff against the particular harm.
Joyce Marie Perry v. Capital One, N.A. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
denied, 96-3090 (La.10/31/97), Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620 (1972).
Perry v. Capital One, N. A. 1 So. 3d 794 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
denied, 96-3090 (La.10/31/97), ; Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Knicely v. Xyz Ins. Co. 997 So. 2d 8 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
In the Supreme Court's important early ruling in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, , (1972), the court observed: If we assume that the defendant was under a duty not to leave the ladder leaning against the house because of an unreasonable risk of harm, the breach of that duty does not necessarily give rise to liability in this case.
Clarkston v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 989 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
471 , *193 (1962), and Hill v. Lundin & Associates, , (1972).
Clarkston v. LA. FARM BUREAU CAS. INS. CO. 989 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
471 , *193 (1962), and Hill v. Lundin & Associates, , (1972).
Jones v. Gaines 978 So. 2d 522 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
As observed by the Supreme Court in Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972): Foreseeability is not always a reliable guide, and certainly it is not the only criterion for determining whether there is a duty-risk relationship.
TRAVELERS PROP. CAS. CO. OF AMER. v. Pratt 940 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
denied, 96-3090 (La.10/31/97), ; Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America v. Pratt 940 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
denied, 96-3090 (La.10/31/97), ; Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Severn Place v. American Bldg. Services 930 So. 2d 125 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
3 Cir. 5/2/01) , , citing Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., Inc.
Stephenson v. Commercial Travelers Ins. 893 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
(citing Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., , (1972)).
Pamela Ferrera Stephenson v. Commercial Travelers Mutual Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
(citing Hill v. Lundin & Assoc., ).
George Setliff v. Rapides Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
2 Cir. 1989), a case involving an injury to a high school student, reminded us that: In Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620, 623 (1972), the Louisiana Supreme Court quoted from a law review article by Wex Malone explaining the rationale behind this [the duty-risk] analysis: All rules of conduct, irrespective of whether they are the product of a legislature or are a part of the fabri
Setliff v. Rapides Parish School Bd. 888 So. 2d 1156 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
2 Cir.1989), a case involving an injury to a high school student, reminded us that: In Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972), the Louisiana Supreme Court quoted from a law review article by Wex Malone explaining the rationale behind this [the duty-risk] analysis: All rules of conduct, irrespective of whether they are the product of a legislature or are a part of the fabric of the court-made law of negligence, exi
Scarbrough v. OK Guard Dogs 879 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
See also Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).
Celia Ann Marks v. Ohmeda, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., So.2d 620 (1972); Roberts v. Benoit, supra.
Marks v. Ohmeda, Inc. 871 So. 2d 1148 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972); Roberts v. Benoit, supra .
Thomas v. SISTERS OF CHARITY OF INCAR. WORD 870 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., , (1972).