Cited by

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

515 citing documents.

Levie v. Orleans Parish School Bd. 537 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Villaronga v. Gelpi Partnership Number 3 536 So. 2d 1307 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Brown v. Otis Elevator Co. 535 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Lenoir v. Sewerage and Water Bd. 535 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Luckette v. Orkin Exterminating Co. 534 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Boyer v. Seal 534 So. 2d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
the court referred to Holland v. Buckley stating: ...
Fournier v. City of New Orleans 533 So. 2d 1044 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Vath v. Alonzo 532 So. 2d 927 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
this article has been interpreted so as to impose liability on the custodian of a defective thing which causes damage, whether the custodian of the thing knew of the defect or not.
Street v. Equitable Petroleum Corp. 532 So. 2d 887 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Luttrell v. International Paper Co. 532 So. 2d 389 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
imposes strict liability on a landowner when a recognizably dead tree in the middle of a forest falls on a professional logger immediately after he felled a nearby tree.
Herron v. Lincoln Property Co. 525 So. 2d 1189 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Griffin v. Foti 523 So. 2d 935 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Michel v. Ascension Parish Police Jury 524 So. 2d 1369 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Gaspard v. Pargas of Eunice, Inc. 527 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
King v. Louviere 524 So. 2d 65 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
The benchmark decision addressing article 2317 is, of course
Wall v. Alleman 519 So. 2d 155 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Moon v. City of Baton Rouge 522 So. 2d 117 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Tracy v. Jefferson Parish 523 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Conner v. Motel 6, Inc. 521 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Once these elements are proven, the custodian can escape liability only by showing that the harm was caused by the fault of the victim, by the fault of a third person, or by an irresistible force.” See also, Jones v. City of Baton Rouge, Parish of East Baton Rouge, (La.App.
Brady v. State ex rel. Louisiana Health & Human Resources Administration 525 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
One of the modifications of art. 2317 is art. 2319, which provides, “[T]he curators of insane persons are answerable for the damage occasioned by those under their care.” stated that the principal of fault underlying articles 2317 and 2322 (1870) was the same as that underlying article 2319.
White v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 525 So. 2d 145 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Garrett v. City of Baton Rouge 521 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Batiste v. City of New Orleans 518 So. 2d 1180 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Wilson v. Hibernia Nat. Bank 517 So. 2d 1206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Riche v. City of Baton Rouge 515 So. 2d 765 La. 1987
Perro v. State 517 So. 2d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
The Supreme Court, discussed the concept of strict liability and the legal basis for such liability as follows: When harm results from the conduct or defect of a person or thing which creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others, a person legally responsible under these code articles for the supervision, care or *263 guardi
Bowles v. Litton Industries, Inc. 518 So. 2d 1070 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
McNeely v. National Hot Rod Ass'n 520 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
David v. Reon 520 So. 2d 820 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Brown v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. 514 So. 2d 439 La. 1987
art. 2317, [20] both the manufacturer and the custodian of an unreasonably dangerous, i.e., defective thing, are strictly liable in solido for any resulting injuries.
Zellers v. National American Ins. Co. 514 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
2 Cir.1983), writ denied
Mansour v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 510 So. 2d 1305 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Jeansonne v. Reyes 508 So. 2d 1034 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Duffy v. State, Dept. of Transp., etc., supra
Lewis v. State, Department of Highways 510 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Howard v. Allstate Ins. Co. 510 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Brannon v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. 507 So. 2d 194 La. 1987
Brown v. Sears Roebuck & Co. 503 So. 2d 1122 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
the Supreme Court stated that to establish the liability of a defendant under La.C.C.
Dupre v. Saenger Arts Center, Inc. 508 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Barbin on Behalf of Barbin v. State 506 So. 2d 888 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Mouton v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co. 509 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
[T] [sic], [provides] one of the leading cases on the [law of] strict liability.
Chatelain v. PROJECT SQUARE 505 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Rollins v. Elks Place Professional Plaza 505 So. 2d 149 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Hines v. Dept. of Transp. & Development 503 So. 2d 724 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
" , (La.1975), it repeated several times that the defect in the thing must create an unreasonable risk of injury.
Lognion v. Calcasieu Parish Police Jury 503 So. 2d 1092 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Sellers v. Caddo Parish Com'n 503 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
Ross v. La Coste De Monterville 502 So. 2d 1026 La. 1987
Duvalle v. Lake Kenilworth, Inc. 503 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Deville v. STATE EX REL. DOTD 498 So. 2d 1142 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Gallagher v. Favrot 499 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
Dean v. Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal Dist. 496 So. 2d 1352 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986