Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Livingston Par. Sch. Bd. v. Fireman's Fund Am. Ins. Co., 282 So. 2d 478.

50 citing documents.

Billy Ray Hodge v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, XYZ Insurance Company, Nicolas Hopkins La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
Estate of John. F. Munsterman v. Unitrin Auto & Home Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
at 825 (quoting Livingston Parish School Board v. Fireman’s Fund American Insurance Co., ), the Louisiana Supreme Court explained: “‘Where a policy unambiguously and clearly limits coverage to acts discovered and reported during the policy term, such limitation of liability is not per se impermissible.’” The Hood court noted, however, that the foregoing is applicable to claims made policies r
The Kansas City Southern Railway Company and Union Pacific Railroad Company v. The Wood Energy Group, Inc. and … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2020
Dorsey v. Purvis Contracting Grp., LLC 236 So. 3d 737 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2017
Reynolds, 634 So.2d at 1183 ; Livingston Parish School Board v. Fireman's Fund American Insurance Company , (La.
Davis v. Nola Home Construction, L.L.C. 222 So. 3d 833 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Bilyeu v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh 184 So. 3d 69 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
Lalonde v. Vallot 168 So. 3d 457 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Joyce Gorman v. City of Opelousas 148 So. 3d 888 La. 2014
Co., the appellate court resorted to its prior decisions in Murray and Pittman v. Nutmeg Ins.
Joyce Gorman v. City of Opelousas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Wright v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 57 So. 3d 382 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Oscar Gray, Jr. v. Mel Credeur La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Hood v. Cotter 5 So. 3d 819 La. 2008
Guthrie v. LOUISIANA MEDICAL MUT. INS. CO. 975 So. 2d 804 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
The holding in Anderson was based, in part, on Livingston Parish School Board v. Fireman's Fund American Insurance *810 Company
Supreme Services v. Sonny Greer, Inc. 958 So. 2d 634 La. 2007
Reynolds, 634 So.2d at 1183 ; Oceanonics
Marsh Engineering, Inc. v. Ernest L. Parker La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Marsh Engineering, Inc. v. Parker 951 So. 2d 492 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Guidry v. Lee Consulting Engineering, Inc. 945 So. 2d 785 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
Regions Bank v. Carroll Kountz, Ken Sullivan and Bryant Kountz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
In Livingston Parish School Board v. Fireman’s Fund American Insurance Co., the supreme court addressed the nature of claims- made policies and stated the often-cited general rule that “[w]here a policy unambiguously and clearly limits coverage to acts discovered and reported during the policy term, such limitation of liability is not per se impermissible.” In doing so, the
Regions Bank v. Kountz 931 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
the supreme court addressed the nature of claims-made policies and stated the often-cited general rule that "[w]here a policy unambiguously and clearly limits coverage to acts discovered and reported during the policy term, such limitation of liability is not per se impermissible."
Burns v. CLD, INC. 886 So. 2d 607 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
in which it concluded that a "claims made" policy that clearly limited coverage to acts discovered and reported during the policy period is not "per se impermissible."
Sanches v. Morris 802 So. 2d 755 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
Co., et al., , (La.1973); Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association v. Interstate Fire & Casualty Co., 93-0911 (La.1/14/94), .
Robicheaux v. Adly 779 So. 2d 1048 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
Verhalen v. FORUM HEALTH MANAGEMENT 771 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Anderson v. Ichinose 760 So. 2d 302 La. 1999
Co., this court rejected a public policy attack on a claims-made policy.
Gary v. Witherspoon 743 So. 2d 708 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
Co., our supreme court analyzed claims-made policies in the context of the insured-insurer relationship.
Pittman v. Nutmeg Insurance Co. 708 So. 2d 832 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Dunn v. Bryant 701 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
[6] Hedgepeth v. Guerin, 96-1044 (La.App.
Ward v. Vizzini 695 So. 2d 1012 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Co. et al, (1973) (citations omitted), Justice Tate, speaking for the Court found: Where a policy unambiguously and clearly limits coverage to acts discovered and reported during the policy term, such limitation of liability is not per se impermissible.
Hedgepeth v. Guerin 691 So. 2d 1355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Murray v. City of Bunkie 686 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Williams v. Lemaire 655 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Reichert v. Bertucci 650 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Spurrell v. Ivey 630 So. 2d 1378 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
Co., Poirier v. National Union Fire Ins.
Case v. Louisiana Medical Mut. Ins. Co. 624 So. 2d 1285 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
Kantack v. Progressive Ins. Co. 618 So. 2d 494 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
Cowen v. Mercury Finance Co. 607 So. 2d 1067 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
Bank of La. v. Mmahat, Duffy, Opotowsky & Walker 608 So. 2d 218 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
A similar argument was advanced in Livingston Parish School Board v. Fireman's Fund American Insurance Company, et al, wherein the late Justice Tate, as organ of the Court, held specifically that such insurance contracts are not violative of freedom of contract principles, are not unconscionable, and are not contrary to public policy.
Jefferson Guar. Bank v. Westbank-Marrero Cab Co. 570 So. 2d 498 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
Our Supreme Court stated: "Where a policy unambiguously and clearly limits coverage to acts discovered and reported during the policy term, such *501 limitation of liability is not per se impermissible."
Pareti v. Sentry Indem. Co. 536 So. 2d 417 La. 1988
Poirier v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. 517 So. 2d 225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Armstrong v. Land & Marine Applicators, Inc. 463 So. 2d 1331 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
1974) [general liability policy]; [professional liability policy]; (La.App.
Aetna Ins. Co. v. Grady White Boats, Inc. 432 So. 2d 1082 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
App. 3 Cir.1982); Oceanonics, Breaux v. St.
Jones v. Allstate Ins. Co. 429 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Cole v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 427 So. 2d 522 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
App. 3 Cir.1982); Breaux v. St.
Jones v. MFA Mut. Ins. Co. 410 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Lopez v. Blue Cross of Louisiana 386 So. 2d 697 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Dement v. International Paper Co. 363 So. 2d 952 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
This type of "discovery" or "claims made"
Breaux v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 326 So. 2d 891 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
Pierrotti v. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF SOUTHWEST 295 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
Oceanonics, Inc. v. Petroleum Distributing Company 292 So. 2d 190 La. 1974
[3] this Court considered a policy insuring the risk of professional errors and omissions (a professional liability policy).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by