Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Canter v. Koehring Company, 283 So. 2d 716.

2744 citing documents.

Bourque v. Gulf Marine Transp., Inc. 480 So. 2d 337 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Succession of Miller v. Moss 479 So. 2d 1035 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Diodene v. Blueridge, Inc. 480 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Barnett v. Duraso 479 So. 2d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Arceneaux v. Domingue, supra.
Dement v. International Paper Co. 479 So. 2d 993 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Hanks v. Calcasieu Parish Police Jury 479 So. 2d 1010 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
requires that: “When there is evidence before the trier of fact which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a reasonable factual basis for the trial court’s finding, on review the appellate court should not disturb this factual finding in the absence of manifest error.
Demars v. Luneau Mobile Home Sales, Inc. 479 So. 2d 1025 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Ducote v. Luneau Mobile Home Sales, Inc. 479 So. 2d 1028 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Fauria v. Doe 483 So. 2d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
the Supreme Court stated: “Preliminarily, however, we address ourselves to an error of appellate review of fact exhibited by the majority opinion: When there is evidence before the trier of fact which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a reasonable factual basis for the trial c
Pringle v. Williamson Chevrolet, Buick & Pontiac, Inc. 480 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
Dickerson v. Zurich-American Ins. Co. 479 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
However, when the trial court relies upon depositions, and Arceneaux v. Domingue, supra , do not apply because the trial court is unable to observe the demeanor of the witness and the trial court is in no better position to assess credibility than the appellate court.
Turner ex rel. Turner v. Rankins 479 So. 2d 404 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Stablier v. Big T Welding Supply Co. 479 So. 2d 418 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
On appeal, a “reviewing court must give great weight to the factual conclusions arrived at by the trier of fact, and reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable.” Cadiere, 364 So.2d at 999
Giles v. Giles 479 So. 2d 627 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Achord v. K-Mart Corp. 479 So. 2d 425 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Vallery v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP. AND DEV. 480 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Gill v. Doe 479 So. 2d 36 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
Hurst v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 478 So. 2d 1361 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
The Louisiana Supreme Court has stated that: “When there is evidence before the trier fact, which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a reasonable basis for the trial court’s finding, on review the appellate court should not disturb the factual finding in absence of manifest error.”
Pelican Electrical Contractors v. Williams 479 So. 2d 19 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
the trial judge was best able to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and evaluate their credibility.
Neumeyer v. Terral 478 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
Farlow v. Roddy 478 So. 2d 953 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
Clakeley v. Ochsner Foundation Hosp. 478 So. 2d 1335 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
ll settled that a reviewing court must give great weight of factual conclusions of the trier-of-fact, particularly when they involve a determination of the credibility of witnesses, thus a reviewing court should not disturb this factual finding in the absence of manifest error, Crochet, supra ; Calais v. Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.
Miller v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 478 So. 2d 200 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Canter v. Koehring *203 Co., (La.App.
Ray Chevrolet-Olds, Inc. v. Garbarino 479 So. 2d 374 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Such a : “the reviewing court must give great weight to factual conclusions of the trier of fact; where there is conflict in the testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of *377 fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluatio
Remn Const. Corp. v. Keating 478 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Jones v. State, Dept. of Transp. & Develop. 478 So. 2d 691 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Finley v. Bass 478 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
Arceneaux v. Domingue, supra.
Andrus v. State, Dept. of Transp. and Dev. 476 So. 2d 1077 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Our duty in reviewing a trial court's findings, particularly where there is conflicting testimony, (La.
Shell Oil Co. v. Pitman 476 So. 2d 1031 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Pousson v. Pousson 476 So. 2d 1105 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Davis v. Allstate Insurance Co. 476 So. 2d 1111 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
: “When there is evidence before the trier of fact which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a reasonable factual basis for the trial court’s *1113 finding, on review the appellate court should not disturb this factual finding in the absence of manifest error.
Rubel v. West Jefferson General Hospital 477 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
It is a well-settled principle of our law that findings of fact should not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of manifest error
La. Ass'n of Educators v. Iberia Par. Sch. Bd. 476 So. 2d 1086 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Walker v. Maybelline Co. 477 So. 2d 1136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Topole v. Eidson 476 So. 2d 518 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Walker v. Insured Lloyds 477 So. 2d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
In support of its position
Matter of Succession of Lindsey 477 So. 2d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Cross v. Hingle 475 So. 2d 1384 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
Ryan v. State 477 So. 2d 110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Laborde v. Velsicol Chemical Corp. 474 So. 2d 1320 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Longo v. Longo 474 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
Mushatt v. Barouise 474 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
“When there is evidence before the trier of fact which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a reasonable factual basis for the trial court’s finding, on review the appellate court should not disturb this factual finding in the absence of manifest error.”
Turner v. Winn Dixie Louisiana, Inc. 474 So. 2d 966 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
See also Elmwood Plantation, Inc. v. Ruud Water Heater, et al, The finding that Bowers and Hurst were aware of plaintiff's lawsuit places Winn Dixie squarely within the confines of R.S.
Arteck Services, Inc. v. Crown Point Industries, Inc. 473 So. 2d 345 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Hebert v. Domingue 473 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Lachney v. Sentry Insurance Co. 471 So. 2d 1058 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Moore v. Beauregard Parish Sheriff 471 So. 2d 1083 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
: “When there is evidence before the trier of fact which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a rea *1085 sonable factual basis for the trial court’s finding, on review the appellate court should not disturb this factual finding in the absence of manifest error.
Standard Fittings Co. v. South Central Bell Telephone Co. 471 So. 2d 1144 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Flagg Properties, Inc. v. South Louisiana Stud, Inc. 473 So. 2d 129 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Harrington v. City of Abbeville 471 So. 2d 1160 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
we do not disturb the lower court's finding of liability.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by