Cited by

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

515 citing documents.

Wiley v. Sanders 850 So. 2d 771 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Ebarb v. Guinn Bros., Inc., supra .
Faulkner v. McCarty Corp. 853 So. 2d 24 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
451 n. 7 (La.1975), the Supreme Court defined article 2317 "custody": 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.
Jones v. Cobb 834 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
the supreme court explained the standard for strict liability under article 2318, stating that the parent of a minor child is liable for the damage caused by the child's conduct which creates an unreasonable risk of injury to others, even though the parent is not personally negligent and the child is too yo
Butler v. Re/Max New Orleans Properties, Inc. 828 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Spott v. Otis Elevator, Co.
Hebert v. ANCO Insulation, Inc. 835 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
-448 (La.1975), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that in order for a plaintiff to recover in strict liability from the owner or custodian of the allegedly defective thing, the plaintiff must prove the vice ( i.e., the unreasonable risk of injury to another) in the thing causing the damage and that the damage resul
Young v. City of Plaquemine 818 So. 2d 898 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Doughty, 576 So.2d at 464
Joseph v. Entergy 811 So. 2d 54 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
451 n. 7 (La.1975), the Supreme Court defined article 2317 "custody": 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.
Lofton v. Hayward 806 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
2 Cir. 3/1/00) , , writ denied, 2000-0938 (La.5/26/00)
Wiley v. Sanders 796 So. 2d 51 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
Jones v. Cobb 793 So. 2d 495 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
1974) providing interpretation for La.
Myers v. Dronet 801 So. 2d 1097 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern RR 786 So. 2d 682 La. 2001
CIV.CODE ANN. art. 2317; Sistler, 558 So.2d at 1106
Johnson v. Meridith 780 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Johnson v. Conclasure 780 So. 2d 1261 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Snearl v. Mercer 780 So. 2d 563 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
art. 2317; Sistler, 558 So.2d at 1112 ; -51 (La.1975).
Melerine v. State 773 So. 2d 831 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
Grieff v. Parish of Jefferson 780 So. 2d 425 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
The Louisiana Supreme Court, summarized the doctrine of strict liability under Articles 2322 and 2317.
Dupree v. City of New Orleans 765 So. 2d 1002 La. 2000
Strouse v. M & M PROPERTIES 753 So. 2d 434 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Johnson v. Brookshire Grocery Co., Inc. 754 So. 2d 346 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Hebert v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. 757 So. 2d 814 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
Prudhomme v. City of Iowa 758 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
Cortez v. Zurich Ins. Co. 752 So. 2d 957 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Simeon v. Doe, 618 So.2d at 851
Robertson v. State 747 So. 2d 1276 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Hunter v. Town of Sibley 745 So. 2d 820 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Tyrney v. City of Madisonville 745 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Jacobs v. City of Bunkie 737 So. 2d 14 La. 1999
9:2800, we held that strict liability for damagecausing things under Article 2317 applied to a municipality, and rejected the earlier rule from Pickens v. St.
Carroll v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. 732 So. 2d 1263 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Gilbert, supra ; DeRouen v. Audirsch, 25,847 (La.App.2d Cir.6/28/94), .
Penton v. Schuster 732 So. 2d 597 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
Ebarb v. Guinn Bros., Inc. 728 So. 2d 487 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Olivier v. Alexander 737 So. 2d 772 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Toups v. Cochran 720 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
4 Cir. 9/29/94), writs denied, 94-2623, 94-2666 (La.12/16/94), , Plaintiffs do not even allege liability under these factors much less offer evidence to support them.
Banks v. State Farm Ins. Co. 717 So. 2d 687 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Haynes v. New Orleans Archdiocesan Cemeteries 716 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Garde is the “legal responsibility for its care of keeping.” , 447 n. 6 (La.1975).
Small v. Baloise Ins. Co. of America 753 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
n. 6 (La.1975) describes garde as "the legal responsibility for its care of keeping" and explains that "one may lose the custody of a thing without losing its `garde,'" citing H.L.
Gilbert v. BDOWS, INC. 711 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
DeRouen v. Audirsch, 25,847 (La.App.2d Cir. 6/28/94), .
Jackson v. Beasley 712 So. 2d 162 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Vigh v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. 706 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
McCarthy v. First Financial Ins. 705 So. 2d 1137 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Graves v. Page 703 So. 2d 566 La. 1997
our courts have held the defendant liable if he or she bore a legally significant relationship to a thing, building, person, animal or product that presented an unreasonable risk of harm.
Nalle v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. 702 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Tyler v. Our Lady of the Lake Hosp., Inc. 696 So. 2d 681 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Grant v. Allstate Ins. Co. 696 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Maxwell v. Board of Trustees 692 So. 2d 641 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Grant v. Allstate Insurance Co. 688 So. 2d 703 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Lott v. Lebon 687 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Thomas v. Medical Center of Southwest Louisiana 685 So. 2d 706 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Rabito v. Otis Elevator Co., 93-1001, 93-1002 (La.App.
Warren v. Campagna 686 So. 2d 969 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Migues v. City of Lake Charles 682 So. 2d 946 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Gray v. Economy Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. 682 So. 2d 966 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996