DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Gonzales v. Xerox Corp., 320 So. 2d 163.

600 citing documents.

  • Parker v. South La. Contractors, Inc. 370 So. 2d 1310 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
    the Supreme Court made it abundantly clear that for the sake of judicial economy, when an appellate court has all the facts before it, a trial judge's erroneous instructions to the jury or rulings on evidence do not warrant a remand.
  • Moity v. Busch 368 So. 2d 1134 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    375 (La.1869); , (1969).
  • Arceneaux v. Domingue 365 So. 2d 1330 La. 1978
  • Woods v. Cumis Ins. Society, Inc. 364 So. 2d 213 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    The question now is whether to remand the case for a the Supreme Court reversed a Court of Appeal judgment, remanding the case for a new jury trial because of reversible error in the jury instructions of the trial court.
  • Brasseaux v. Vermilion Parish Police Jury 361 So. 2d 35 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
    1977); , footnote 1 (La.1975).
  • Gordon v. City of New Orleans 363 So. 2d 235 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    [5] Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, La., ; Miller v. Employers Mut.
  • Bellard v. Woodward Wight & Co. 362 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    However, the evidence is in the record, we proceed to determine that factual issue on the basis of the record.
  • Beck v. Lovell 361 So. 2d 245 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
  • Von Dameck v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. 361 So. 2d 283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
  • Hanks v. Drs. Ranson, Swan & Burch, Ltd. 359 So. 2d 1089 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
  • People's Nat. Bank of New Iberia v. Smith 360 So. 2d 560 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
  • Chappuis v. Sears Roebuck & Co. 358 So. 2d 926 La. 1978
  • Porter v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co. 357 So. 2d 1234 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1978
  • Davis v. Moore 353 So. 2d 740 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    Morgan v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
  • Standard Co. of New Orleans v. Elliott Construction Co. 359 So. 2d 224 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, La., (1975).
  • Saunders v. T. G. & Y. Stores Co. 354 So. 2d 1092 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    Even if the jury’s verdict is disregarded and the appeal adjudicated on an independent review of the evidence by this court, the evidence clearly preponderates that the force used by the store manager in attempting to detain plaintiff was reasonable and commensurate with the force used by plaintiff in her efforts to avoid detention.
  • Burns v. Lamar-Lane Chevrolet, Inc. 354 So. 2d 620 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
  • Robinson v. Palm Apartments 353 So. 2d 1120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    Couto v. Oms, La., (1975); Gonzales v. Xerox Corp., La., (1975).
  • Higgins v. Johnson 349 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    In disposing of this precise issue our Supreme Court, stated: "[T]here could hardly have been any more important legal principle for the consideration of the jury than that defendant's failure to see what he could have seen by the exercise of due diligence does not absolve him from liability.
  • Miller v. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. 349 So. 2d 1353 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
  • Kidder v. Anderson 345 So. 2d 922 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    We have reviewed the evidence, first, as a reviewing court, to see if the jury committed manifest error in reaching its verdict; and secondly, as a to examine the evidence as a trier of fact, in order to render a judgment based on the record.
  • Hernandez v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 346 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    but a prejudicial ruling by a trial judge should not deprive a party of the right to a jury trial.
  • Gaudet v. Allstate Ins. Co. 346 So. 2d 333 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
    [9] Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., supra; Temple v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
  • Corceller v. Brooks 347 So. 2d 274 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
  • Andrepont v. Naquin 345 So. 2d 1216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    See, also, (1975), and the authorities therein cited.
  • Maus v. Schouest 342 So. 2d 715 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
  • Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. 341 So. 2d 332 La. 1977
    The Court of Appeal's conclusion that this Court intends for the appellate courts to continue to review quantum awards, is correct [1] as is shown by all of the cases previously cited, and Temple v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
  • AE Landvoigt, Inc. v. LOUISIANA STATE EMP. RETIREMENT SYSTEM 337 So. 2d 881 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    Under the recently announced rule espoused by the Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, et al., La., , we shall assess damages herein rather than remand this matter to the trial court for performance of this function.
  • Trinity Universal Insurance v. Mallard Truck Lines, Inc. 340 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    As to the specification of error concerning the Trial Judge’s instructions to the jury, we are of the opinion that in light of the Supreme Court’s there is no need for us to determine whether the Trial Judge was in error or not.
  • Perry v. Law 334 So. 2d 523 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, La., (1975).
  • Ford v. Knight 337 So. 2d 1225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    (1st La.App., 1969); (1st La.App., 1967).
  • Brown v. Zito 333 So. 2d 649 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
    would seem to indicate an answer in the affirmative.
  • Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. 330 So. 2d 649 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
    (1969), a leading case on the question of remand because of erroneous instructions, the court specifically reserved to the appellate forums the right to decide in each particular case whether a remand would serve the interests of justice.
  • State, Department of Highways v. Olinkraft, Inc. 333 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
  • St. Bernard Body & Fender, Inc. v. Catalanotto 330 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    Rather than remand for the trial judge to make that evaluation (see Gonzales v. Xerox Corp., La.1975, ), we ourselves decide that the husband’s testimony of having timely instructed the repairman not to repair is to be believed rather than the repairman’s testimony that he never heard from the husband until the repairs were nearly completed.
  • Couto v. Oms 331 So. 2d 236 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
    decided by this Court, October 1, 1975.” (Emphasis ours.)
  • Bates v. Bates 331 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    the trial court, after a jury trial, had dismissed plaintiff’s suit.
  • Temple v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. 330 So. 2d 891 La. 1976
    we stated that an appellate court, if it has a complete record of all the necessary evidence before it, has a constitutional duty [1] to review the facts of a case as well as the law and to render a judgment on the merits.
  • Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation 329 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, cited supra, and the opinion in the same case of the Louisiana Supreme Court on writ of review, .
  • Wilkinson v. Travelers Insurance Co. 330 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    As to the specifications of error concerning the Trial Judge’s instructions to the jury and his refusing to submit the action to the jury on a general verdict form, we are of the opinion that in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision of Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, La., (1975) there is no need for us to determine whether the Trial Judge was in error or not.
  • Couto v. Oms 323 So. 2d 128 La. 1975
    decided by this Court, October 1, 1975.
  • Couto v. Oms 323 So. 2d 128 La. 1975
    decided by this Court, October 1, 1975.
  • Reeves v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 320 So. 2d 902 La. 1975
    See Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation et al., La., (Handed down October 1, 1975).
  • Reeves v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 320 So. 2d 902 La. 1975
    See Gonzales v. Zer-ox Corp. et al., La., (Handed down October 1, 1975).
  • Calvert v. Simon 311 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1975
  • Gonzales v. Xerox Corp. 307 So. 2d 153 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
  • Dixon v. Copeland 289 So. 2d 261 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
  • Bush v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company 264 So. 2d 717 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
  • Foster v. McClain 251 So. 2d 179 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
    1006 , (1952); , (1969).
  • Brown v. News-World Publishing Corp. 245 So. 2d 430 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971