Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Loescher v. Parr, 324 So. 2d 441.

515 citing documents.

Vicki Hood v. Sasol Chemicals (Usa) LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
Scott Loupe and Natalie Loupe, on behalf of their minor child, G.L. v. The Roman Catholic Church of … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2023
Truxillo v. Louisiana Stadium & Exposition District 172 So. 3d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
The Louisiana Supreme Court has held that “under most circumstances, ownership alone establishes the requisite benefit, control and authority to find garde.” Doughty v. Insured Lloyds Insurance Co., et al., , , 449 n. 7 (La.1975).
Davis v. Riverside Court Condominium Ass'n Phase II, Inc. 154 So. 3d 643 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Evelyn Honore, Et Ux. v. Family Dollar Stores of Louisiana, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Honore v. Family Dollar Stores of Louisiana, Inc. 115 So. 3d 1234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Broussard v. State ex rel. Office of State Buildings 113 So. 3d 175 La. 2013
See, e.g., Dupree, 99-3651 at p. 5, 765 So.2d at 1008 ; Jones v. Hawkins, 98-1259 (La.3/19/99), ; Oster, 582 So.2d at 1288
Markus Trautmann, Et Ux. v. Charles G. Fitzgerald La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/07), -447 (La.1975).
Trautmann v. Fitzgerald 113 So. 3d 429 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/07), 955 So.2d *442 758 ; -147 (La.'l975).
Theresa St. Julien v. Julie Walters Landry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Julien v. Landry 94 So. 3d 976 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Price v. Martin 79 So. 3d 960 La. 2011
this court held that claims under La.
Williams v. Galofaro 79 So. 3d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Civ.Code art. 2317, -449 (La.1976).
Chambers v. Village of Moreauville 60 So. 3d 125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
A “defect” for purposes of article 2317 can be described as any “risk-creating harm.”
Williams v. Ruben Residential Properties, LLC 58 So. 3d 534 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Pearson v. DELAUNE 54 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Smegal v. Gettys 48 So. 3d 431 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Del Dean David, Et Ux. v. Velsicol Chemical Corp. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Susan and Edward L. Wilhelm v. Mosaic Global Operations, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
David v. Velsicol Chem. Corp. 49 So. 3d 997 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Meaux v. Wendy's International, Inc. 51 So. 3d 778 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
5 Cir. 4/24/07) , ; -447 (La.1975).
Moffitt v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans 40 So. 3d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
(emphasis added) The traditional notions of strict liability imbedded in decisions such as Loescher v. Pan", are nearly entirely abrogated by the Lawmaker’s amendments to the Civil Code which resulted in the current versions of the articles cited as well as to La.
Noel v. Housing Authority of New Orleans 36 So. 3d 982 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Everett v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. 37 So. 3d 456 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc. 16 So. 3d 1065 La. 2009
n. 6, quoting David E. Verlander III, We Are Responsible, 2 Tul.
Willie Mae Ambrose v. City of New Iberia La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Ambrose v. City of New Iberia 11 So. 3d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Price v. Tenneco Oil Co. 996 So. 2d 1260 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Holland v. Teague 996 So. 2d 325 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
g that the "unreasonable risk of harm" criterion still applies for the measure of strict liability for dog-related injuries, the court observed: Given that Article 2317 and the first clause of former Article 2321, now the first sentence of revised Article 2321, seemingly impose liability without fault in all cases upon the owner or guardian of the defective thing or animal, the Loescher [v. Parr, (La.
Graves v. Riverwood Intern. Corp. 949 So. 2d 576 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Specifically, Olin asserts that "[T]he jury did not receive a *584 and they did not receive an instruction (nor were they allowed to decide) the factual issue of whether asbestos was an oxygen or metal compound."
Ronald K. Chavers v. Bright Truck Leasing Corp. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Chavers v. Bright Truck Leasing 945 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
McBride v. XYZ Insurance 935 So. 2d 326 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
Carl Harris Hesse v. Champ Service Line La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Hesse v. CHAMP SERVICE LINE 933 So. 2d 247 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Washington v. State ex rel. Department of Social Services 927 So. 2d 1224 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
Prior to 1996, 2 Article 2317, *1228 (La.1975) and its progeny, imposed strict liability solely “based upon the relationship, i.e. supervision and control, between the person with custody and the thing posing an unreasonable risk of harm to others.” Dupree v. City of New Orleans, 99-3651 (La.8/31/00), .
Granda v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co. 935 So. 2d 698 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Granda v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co. 935 So. 2d 703 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Giorgio v. Alliance Operating Corp. 921 So. 2d 58 La. 2006
Zimko v. American Cyanamid 905 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
art. 2317 [ i.e., was decided] and because American Cyanamid did not have custody of the asbestos fibers that allegedly clung to his father's clothes, he cannot recover in strict liability under article 2317.
Lafayette Parish School Board v. Darlene M. Cormier, on Behalf of Her Minor Child, Jade Cormier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
At the time of the ruling in Turner v. Bucher, supra, Louisiana’s strict liability law for damages caused by a person or thing in one’s providing interpretation for La.
Lafayette Parish School Bd. v. Cormier 901 So. 2d 1197 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
At the time of the ruling in Turner v. Bucher, supra , Louisiana's strict liability law for damages caused by a providing interpretation for La.
Sevin v. Parish of Plaquemines 901 So. 2d 619 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
Morella v. Board of Commissioners 888 So. 2d 321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
McElveen v. City of New Orleans 888 So. 2d 878 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
this court held that: The things in one's care are those things to which one bears such a relationship as to have the right of direction and control over them and to draw some kind of benefit from them.
Pamplin v. Bossier Parish Community College 878 So. 2d 889 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
Regarding the issue of constructive notice
Engles v. City of New Orleans 872 So. 2d 1166 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
Pepper v. Triplet 864 So. 2d 181 La. 2004
A year later, a case involving a person's liability under La.
Brown v. Williams 850 So. 2d 1116 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
about the healthy looking sixty-foot magnolia which fell across the property line upon the neighbor's Cadillac.
David v. Our Lady of the Lake Hosp., Inc. 849 So. 2d 38 La. 2003

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by