Cited by

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

2744 citing documents.

Picou v. Ferrara 459 So. 2d 1218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
The test to be applied by an appellate court in reviewing a as follows: “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.
Bavido v. Weixel 459 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Bosarge v. New Orleans Street Dept. 459 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Succession of Danese 459 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Blanchard v. Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, Inc. 463 So. 2d 616 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Also well settled are the principles that a reviewing court will not set aside a factual determination by the trial court absent manifest error, Canter v. Koehring, Co.
Mathews v. Mathews 459 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
The language found in the opinion of Justice Tate in Canter v. Koehring Co., et al, is pertinent at this point.
Gonzales v. Louisiana Coca-Cola Bottling Co. 459 So. 2d 624 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Protti v. Tolmas 459 So. 2d 614 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
Wm. B. Coleman Co., Inc. v. Ackel 459 So. 2d 596 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
Clark v. Laird 458 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Ragusa v. Burns 462 So. 2d 658 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF HEALTH & HUMAN RESOURCES v. Smith 459 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Morgan v. General Motors Corp. 459 So. 2d 86 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Thomas v. Jacobs 459 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Harrington v. Oliver 459 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Sepulvado v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center, Inc. 459 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Towns v. Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co. 459 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Fillwock v. Brown & Root, Inc. 458 So. 2d 210 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Bishop v. Bishop 457 So. 2d 264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Curtis v. Breaux 458 So. 2d 582 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Albert v. Ertan 457 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
McQuiston v. Simon 457 So. 2d 271 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Bray v. Isbell 458 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Esco v. Smith 457 So. 2d 786 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Bolden v. Gemoco, Inc. 457 So. 2d 808 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Center v. Parker 457 So. 2d 822 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Licausi v. Department of Health & Human Resources 458 So. 2d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Gulf-Wandes Corp. v. Vinson Guard Service, Inc. 459 So. 2d 14 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Price v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. 457 So. 2d 722 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Harris v. Pizza Hut of Louisiana, Inc. 455 So. 2d 1364 La. 1984
Higgins v. State, Department of Health & Human Resources 458 So. 2d 951 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Jones v. Turlan 455 So. 2d 1250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Francis v. Gervais F. Favrot Co. 455 So. 2d 1272 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
It is well settled that “reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable.” at 724 (La.1973).
Northern v. Department of Streets of New Orleans 455 So. 2d 1288 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Williams v. Anderson 456 So. 2d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
at p. 724, the Supreme Court held: “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
Peacock v. West Carroll Parish Police Jury 454 So. 2d 1253 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Guidry v. Cagle Bros. Circle C Pump Service, Inc. 453 So. 2d 1280 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
We find adequate evidence in the record to support the jury’s determination and we thereby leave it intact pursuant to the guidelines enunciated in Arceneaux v. Domingue, supra
State ex rel. of Four Minor Children 453 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Andrews v. LA. COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO., LTD. 454 So. 2d 1193 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Kikendall v. American Progressive Ins. Co. 457 So. 2d 53 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
1st Cir.1983), writ denied, discussed the standard of review applicable to factual findings based on live testimony as follows: As to facts, delineates our review of facts as first an ascertainment that there is in the record `a reasonable factual basis' for the trial court's factual findings and second a determination from the record that the trial court's factual findings are not `
Lorio v. San Antonio Inn 454 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
In this court's opinion, there is nothing manifestly erroneous in the trial judge's decision to believe Lorio and his wife, rather than the other witnesses, on this point, and therefore we will not disturb this finding of fact
Frank L. Beier Radio, Inc. v. Brown 453 So. 2d 656 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
In Greco , the standard of our review was made clear: " is that even though the Appellate Court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences *661 are as reasonable, it should not disturb reasonable findings of the trial court when there is conflict in the testimony.
Martin v. Gulf South Beverages, Inc. 454 So. 2d 250 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
The seminal decision for all Louisiana jurisprudence dealing with the question of appellate review of a
Bodoin v. Daigle 452 So. 2d 828 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Lumpkin v. Steven's Homes of Leesville, Inc. 452 So. 2d 406 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Gross v. Continental Insurance Co. 451 So. 2d 1285 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Bickham Petroleum Corp. v. Continental Oil Co. 452 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Sosa v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 454 So. 2d 1124 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Matthews v. Allied Chemical Corp. 454 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Gradney v. Vancouver Plywood Co., Inc., Flood, supra
Long v. Panther Airboat Corp. 453 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984