Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Trahan v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 314 So. 2d 350.

80 citing documents.

Knight v. Samuel 447 So. 2d 587 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
the Louisiana Supreme Court defined a cause of action as "...
Quick v. Murphy Oil Co. 446 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Distinguished Garrett v. Diaz Drayage Co. 442 So. 2d 860 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
Co., which held that a suit against an insurer of X did not interrupt prescription as to it as the insurer of Y. The Trahan case is factually distinguishable from our case because here we are dealing with an amended petition and not a separate suit which has been finally decided.
Louviere v. Shell Oil Co. 440 So. 2d 93 La. 1983
Gunter v. Plauche 439 So. 2d 437 La. 1983
Federal Insurance Company v. Insurance Company of North America, 262 La.
Melancon v. Lorde 435 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
Ellenburg v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. 434 So. 2d 1216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
Appellees argued that while it has been held that the cause of action is the state of facts which gives a party the right to judicially assert an action against the defendant, this rule of law does not provide a basis for allowing one party the right to judicially assert all actions of all other parties against the defendant.
Chenier v. Vanguard Party Sales, Inc. 430 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Gauthier v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. 422 So. 2d 627 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
4th Cir.1969); or in separate suits
Bennett v. General Motors Corp. 420 So. 2d 531 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1982
Distinguished Langlinais v. Guillotte 407 So. 2d 1215 La. 1981
The Court of Appeal relied in part, in its contrary determination, (La.App.
Langlinais v. Guillotte 398 So. 2d 106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
and Sizeler v. Employers’ Liability Assurance Corp.
Rogers v. PAYNE AND KELLER OF LOUISIANA, INC. 392 So. 2d 109 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Baker v. Payne & Keller of La., Inc. 390 So. 2d 1272 La. 1980
Johnson v. Fournet 387 So. 2d 1336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Co., states, "The cause of action is the state of facts which give a party a right to judicially assert an action against the defendant."
Osborne v. Callegan 384 So. 2d 567 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
in which the court held that the timely filing of the suit against certain executive officers and their insurer, Liberty Mutual, did not serve to interrupt prescription against Liberty Mutual as the insurer under the same policy of other executive officers where the first suit was tried to judgment dismissin
Baker v. Payne & Keller of Louisiana, Inc. 381 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Guidry v. Theriot 377 So. 2d 319 La. 1979
On the contrary, we indicated in Trahan v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., La., (1975) that such an action is controlled by the general one year prescriptive period of La.C.C.
Palmisano v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty 371 So. 2d 386 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
Co., La.1975, , does not control this case.
Williams v. Williams 371 So. 2d 297 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Arnaud v. Molbert Bros. Poultry & Egg Co. 368 So. 2d 1187 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
which was relied upon by the district court, our supreme court discussed at length the meaning of this phrase.
Stansbury v. Hover 366 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
3rd Cir. 1974), writs refused, , 796 (1974), (La.
Fontenot v. O'BRIEN 361 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
In support thereof, (La.
Gibson v. Exxon Corp. 360 So. 2d 230 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Welch v. Crown Zellerbach Corp. 359 So. 2d 154 La. 1978
in sustaining the defendant's plea *156 of prescription.
McClendon v. State, Through Dept. of Corrections 357 So. 2d 1218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Co., Stephenson v. New Orleans Ry.
Welch v. Crown Zellerbach Corp. 351 So. 2d 1255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
the Louisiana Supreme Court held to this effect.
A. Wilbert's Sons Lumber & Shingle Co. v. Chaney 337 So. 2d 1229 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
The cause of action is the state of facts which gives a party a right to judicially assert an action against the defendant.” citing National Surety Corporation v. Standard Accident Insurance Company, 247 La.
Honeycutt v. Town of Boyce 327 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
Nunez v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 314 So. 2d 356 La. 1975
decided this day, there is before us here a judgment of the Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit overruling defendants’ exceptions of prescription and res judicata.