Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Boudreaux v. American Insurance Company, 264 So. 2d 621.

182 citing documents.

Maryland Casualty Co. v. Saunders 394 So. 2d 1256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
(1972), on rehearing, the eminent civilian scholar and member of the bench of the Louisiana Supreme Court, Justice Tate, reviewed the jurisprudence on the issue of res ipsa loquitur as applied to fire cases: “Recently in Jordan v. Travelers Insurance Co., 257 La.
Litton v. Home Indemnity Co. 391 So. 2d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Western Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Adams 381 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Keller v. Kelly 378 So. 2d 1006 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
Co., 1972, , , by proving as more probable than not that the owner's fault within La.
New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Delaney 379 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Explained Latham v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. 377 So. 2d 350 La. 1979
(1972) (on rehearing), we clarified the above quoted language by stating that circumstantial evidence need not negate all other possible causes of injury ....
Gauthier v. Bogard Seed Co. 377 So. 2d 1290 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
Cosey v. Cosey 376 So. 2d 486 La. 1979
Co., 1972, , , that Lillian was included as a grantee by simple mistake of the secretary-notary.
Villetto v. Weilbaecher 377 So. 2d 132 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
Guillory v. Bertrand 375 So. 2d 144 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Hebert v. Town of Ville Platte 373 So. 2d 229 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Pick v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 372 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Co., , (1972); Hanover Ins.
Pitre v. Bourgeois 371 So. 2d 330 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
the Court in describing the factual circumstances in which the rule of res ipsa loquitur should be applied stated it was when the inference of defendant’s negligence was the “most plausible explanation” or the “more probable cause” of the injury.
Hancock v. Safeco Ins. Co. 368 So. 2d 1162 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
Walker v. Union Oil Mill, Inc. 369 So. 2d 1043 La. 1979
Myers v. Morrow 367 So. 2d 1297 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Co., , (1972); Hanover Ins.
Holloway v. Southern Baptist Hospital 367 So. 2d 871 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
Co., 1972, , , 636: It suffices if the circumstantial proof excludes other reasonable hypotheses only with a fair amount of certainty, so that it be more probable than not that the harm was caused by the tortious conduct of the defendant.
Baker v. Beebe 367 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Aubert v. Charity Hospital of Louisiana 363 So. 2d 1223 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Mouton v. Godchaux's Inc. 360 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
(1972), the court reiterated the principle that the doctrine of res ipsa loqui-tur applies in a situation where the circumstances are of such an unusual nature as to justify, in the absence of other evidence bearing on the subject, the inference that the accident was due to the negligence of the one ha
Narcisse v. Fontcuberta 359 So. 2d 1342 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Ned v. Hertz Corp. 356 So. 2d 1074 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Walker v. Union Oil Mill, Inc. 360 So. 2d 894 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
Cobbs v. Veith 359 So. 2d 303 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Co., , (1972); Morales v. Houston Fire and Casualty Co., Inc., (La.App.
Jenkins v. Ferguson 357 So. 2d 39 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
(1972) has set forth the criteria for the application of this principle.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Terrebonne 356 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Lawyers Title Ins. Co. v. Carey Hodges & Associates, Inc. 358 So. 2d 964 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Cookmeyer v. Cookmeyer 354 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Co., 1972, , , that the husband's payments subsequent to filing the separation action reduced the community debt principal by at least $764.60.
Randall v. Roran Corp. 354 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
McAdams v. Holden 349 So. 2d 900 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Blackshere v. Kemper Ins. Co. 352 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
Mirhosseiny v. Bd. of Sup'rs of La. S. Univ. 351 So. 2d 1318 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Graffeo v. City of New Orleans 351 So. 2d 1311 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
Co., , (1972); Hanover Ins.
Sanchez v. Aetna Life Insurance 350 So. 2d 680 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Evans v. Gentry & Holder Floors, Inc. 349 So. 2d 1367 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Bendana v. Mossy Motors, Inc. 347 So. 2d 946 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
Parker v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 348 So. 2d 91 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Adams v. Eye, Ear, Nose & Throat Hospital 346 So. 2d 327 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Sentry Indem. Co. 346 So. 2d 1331 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
Morales v. Houston Fire & Cas. Co., Inc. 342 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
Co., , (1972); Hanover Ins.
Welton v. Falcon 341 So. 2d 564 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
Williams v. Morris 343 So. 2d 373 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Plaintiff here is required to establish the identity of the public conveyance and must do this by a preponderance of the evidence under the usual rule applicable to plaintiffs as set forth in the case of Boudreaux v. American *375 Insurance Company, , (1972): “Preponderance in law means credibility, influence, and weight and not the number of witnesses.
A & M Pest Control Serv., Inc. v. FEJTA CONST. CO. INC. 338 So. 2d 946 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
995 , (1971); , (rehearing, 1972); (La.App.
Brown v. Southern Ventures Corporation 331 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
particularly applicable to this case.
Perrere v. Bank of New Orleans & Trust Co. 334 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Sheppard v. Travelers Insurance Company 333 So. 2d 342 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
(1972); and Pilie v. National Food Stores of Louisiana, Inc., 245 La.
Cousins v. Henry 332 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
Reggio v. Louisiana Gas Service Co. 333 So. 2d 395 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
(1972), and Hanover Insurance Company v. Jacobson-Young, Inc., (La.App.
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Drost 330 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
After quoting from Boudreaux v. American Insurance Company, La., (1972) the applicable law regarding the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, the trial judge then concluded: "As we apply the principles of the Boudreaux case to the facts at hand, we must conclude that the defendants are liable for the damages incurred.
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Rothman 331 So. 2d 81 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976