DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., 341 So. 2d 332.

1757 citing documents.

  • Theriot v. Allstate Ins. Co. 625 So. 2d 1337 La. 1993
    Our jurisprudence has consistently held that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such awards will be disturbed only when there has been a clear abuse of that discretion, Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.
  • Weeks v. TL James & Co. Inc. 626 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    The Supreme Court further provides, in Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., and in Reck v. Stevens, supra , that before a reviewing court can disturb an award made by a trial court, the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award.
  • Bosworth v. Authement 634 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    American Motorist Insurance Company v. American Rent-All, Inc., Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Feigler v. Transit Management of Southeast Louisiana, Inc. 626 So. 2d 385 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., Biotun [Bitoun] v. Land [Landry] Spillers v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
  • Bowers v. Viator 625 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Williams v. Diehl 625 So. 2d 251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Theriot v. Lasseigne 624 So. 2d 1267 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
  • Alaywan v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. 625 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
  • Hoyt v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 623 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp. 623 So. 2d 1257 La. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., *1261 Spillers v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
  • Norfleet v. Southern Baptist Hospital 623 So. 2d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.App.
  • Finnie v. Vallee 620 So. 2d 897 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    Hobgood, supra at 346 ; Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.App.
  • Berthelot v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. 623 So. 2d 14 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.
  • Risley v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 620 So. 2d 950 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    See Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Keeth v. STATE, EX REL. DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETY & TRANSP. 618 So. 2d 1154 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., *1164 Clark v. Ark-La-Tex Auction, Inc., (La.App.
  • Broussard v. Domingue 619 So. 2d 143 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    For that reason, it is argued that this court is not subject to the standard of review enunciated in Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., which teaches that before an appeal court may disturb an award made by a trial court, the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its much discretion in making its award.
  • Breaux v. Maturin 619 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.App.
  • Giamanco v. Epe, Inc. 619 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Since this increase is made to compensate plaintiff for damages not included in the trial court award, our award is de novo, and we are not limited to the principles of Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Daigle v. Legendre 619 So. 2d 836 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Under Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., if the appellate court finds that the trial court abused its discretion in the amount of damages awarded, the court is limited in raising awards only to the lowest point which is reasonably within the discretion of the trial court.
  • Theriot v. Theriot 622 So. 2d 257 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • McKenzie v. Alton Ochsner Medical Foundation 621 So. 2d 6 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • In Re Medical Review Panel Bilello 621 So. 2d 6 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Talamo v. Shad 619 So. 2d 699 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Bordelon v. SOUTH CENT. BELL TELEPHONE CO. 617 So. 2d 1337 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
  • Provost v. Provost 617 So. 2d 1267 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.App.
  • Martino v. Sunrall 619 So. 2d 87 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.
  • LaCombe v. Dr. Walter Olin Moss Reg. Hosp. 617 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Only after such determination of abuse has been reached, is *617 a resort to prior awards appropriate under Coco [ v. Winston Industries, Inc., ] for purposes of then determining what would be an appropriate award for the present case."
  • Foster v. Town of Mamou 616 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Reck, supra; Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Ryland v. Liberty Lloyds Ins. Co. 617 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., sets forth the applicable law: "We do reemphasize, however, that before a Court of Appeal can disturb an award made by a trial court that the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award....
  • Johnson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 616 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
    Carroll, supra ; Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Taylor v. State 617 So. 2d 1198 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Young v. Armadores De Cabotaje, SA 617 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Breaux v. J.C. Penney Co., Store 617 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
  • Hurst v. Drusilla Seafood of Hammond 616 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    See Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Derouen v. Miller 614 So. 2d 1304 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    In addressing Winn Dixie's assertions of error as to the district court's award of damages, Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., is the applicable law: "We do reemphasize, however, that before a court of appeal can disturb an award made by a trial court that the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award.
  • Gulf Coast Bldg. Systems, Inc. v. UA SURETY CO. LTD. 614 So. 2d 1360 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    3d Cir.1989); Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Alford v. Woods 614 So. 2d 1299 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Cay v. State, Department of Transportation & Development 614 So. 2d 1293 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Only after such determination of abuse has been reached, is a resort to prior awards appropriate under Coco [v. Winston Industries, Inc., ] for purposes of then determining what would be an appropriate award for the present case.
  • Cockerham v. Atlantic Richfield Co. 615 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    In addressing ARCO's assertions of error as to the district court's award of damages, Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., is instructive: "We do reemphasize, however, that before a court of appeal can disturb an award made by a trial court that the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award....
  • Hernandez v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CAS. INS. CO. 615 So. 2d 484 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Nejame v. Hamiter 614 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
  • Guillory v. Terra Intern., Inc. 613 So. 2d 1084 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Cornett v. STATE THROUGH WO MOSS REG. HOSP 614 So. 2d 189 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    Freeman, supra; Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Cornett v. State ex rel. W.O. Moss Regional Hospital 614 So. 2d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    Freeman, supra; Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Sumrall v. Sumrall 612 So. 2d 1010 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
    See Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Austin v. Pascarelli 612 So. 2d 201 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Morton v. Ray 611 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Touchard v. Williams 606 So. 2d 927 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
    Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.App.
  • Hanewinckel v. ST. PAUL'S PROP. & LIABILITY INSURANCE, CO. 611 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
    $460,000 It has long been the law that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such awards will be disturbed only when there has been a clear abuse of that discretion, Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
  • Borgos v. Buras 611 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
    Reck, supra; Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.