Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Baumgartner v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 356 So. 2d 400.

121 citing documents.

Barber Brothers Contracting Company, LLC v. Capitol City Produce Company, LLC Frank Cushenberry And Xyz Insurance Company C/W … La. 2024
Smith v. City of Monroe 267 So. 3d 1218 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
Ida Cosey Wylie v. Joseph C. Peltier, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Clarence Guidry v. City of Rayne Police Dept. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the 3 possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Guidry v. City of Rayne Police Department 26 So. 3d 900 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the Impossible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Clarkston v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 989 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Clarkston v. LA. FARM BUREAU CAS. INS. CO. 989 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Rideau v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 970 So. 2d 564 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Edwards v. LCR-M CORP., INC. 936 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
Kerrigan v. Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. 748 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Kerrigan v. IMPERIAL FIRE AND CAS. INS. 748 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Bell v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co. 707 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
32:214; Myles v. Turner, 24,198 (La.App.2d Cir. 1/19/94), .
Bogan v. O'Connor 703 So. 2d 1382 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Johnson v. Safeway Ins. Co. 694 So. 2d 411 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Sharbino v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 690 So. 2d 73 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Gibson v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. 674 So. 2d 996 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Gibson v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 674 So. 2d 996 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Calcagno v. Decorte 665 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Also, plaintiffs’ counsel requested the jury be charged | ¡¿hat the first duty of an operator of a motor vehicle is to keep a sharp lookout to discover the presence of those in danger.
Uriegas v. Gainsco 663 So. 2d 162 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Co., : The operator of a motor vehicle, a dangerous instrumentality, has the constant duty to watch out for the possible negligent acts of pedestrians and avoid injuring them.
Myles v. Turner 632 So. 2d 384 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
Co., Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., writ denied, and Aetna Cas.
Mutart v. Allstate Insurance Co. 622 So. 2d 803 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
Blair v. Tynes 621 So. 2d 591 La. 1993
Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc.
Bordelon v. SOUTH CENT. BELL TELEPHONE CO. 617 So. 2d 1337 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
Co., Belsha v. Gant, 235 La.
Bacle v. Wade 607 So. 2d 927 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
Bacle v. Wade 607 So. 2d 927 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
Clair v. Paris Road Drugs, Inc. 573 So. 2d 1219 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
[3] a pre-comparative fault case, held that the contributory negligence of a pedestrian in a motorist/pedestrian accident would not bar the pedestrian's recovery.
Devereux v. Allstate Ins. Co. 557 So. 2d 1091 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
Co., and Turner v. NOPSI, supra; this high duty and the superior instrumentality of the car would counsel in favor of assigning more fault to Devereux, perhaps 75%.
Slider v. Myers 557 So. 2d 1111 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
At one time in Louisiana, before the advent of comparative fault, which held that the contributory negligence of a pedestrian would not defeat his recovery against a motorist who was also negligent.
Shroyer v. Grush 555 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
Gibson v. Dixie Insurance Co. 542 So. 2d 635 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Buckbee v. United Gas Pipeline Co., Inc. 542 So. 2d 81 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
Co., is that United Gas had a high degree of care which superseded William Buckbee's ordinary negligence, and the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that William Buckbee's ordinary negligence should not defeat his survivors' tort claim.
Harrison v. Keller 524 So. 2d 212 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Tennis v. Hartford Ins. Co. 523 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Richards v. Everett 513 So. 2d 350 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Lastly, plaintiffs would have this court apply the principles of Baumgartner v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance, Co., to this case.
Andrews v. Mosley Well Service 514 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Co., that a plaintiff-pedestrian's contributory negligence was not a bar to his recovery.
Seaux v. Domingue 509 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Chatelain v. PROJECT SQUARE 505 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Albers v. Fernandez 504 So. 2d 626 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Bennett v. State Dept. of Transp. & Development 503 So. 2d 1022 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
153 (1936); Elliott v. Eaves, supra.
Torres v. US Fidelity and Guar. Co. 499 So. 2d 1293 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
Rottman v. Beverly, 183 La.
Puearry v. STATE, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 496 So. 2d 1372 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Burge v. City of Hammond 489 So. 2d 1320 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Southwestern Transp. Co. 488 So. 2d 978 La. 1986
Garrett v. Celino 489 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
Ms. Ross answered the appeal, contending she is free of fault, and if not, which limited the defense of a contributory negligence in pedestrian-motorist suits, her recovery cannot be diminished because of any alleged contributory negligence.
Massey v. Johnson 488 So. 2d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Payne v. Fimiano 489 So. 2d 332 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Before Turner pedestrian/motorist accidents had been governed *334 that is, that a pedestrian’s contributory negligence is not a complete bar to recovery for injuries inflicted by a negligent motorist.
Motton v. Travelers Ins. Co. 484 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Co., prior to the adoption of a comparative fault system, was that a pedestrian's contributory negligence did not bar recovery.
Miranti v. Jahncke 482 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
In not giving the requested jury charge on comparative negligence, 1 in which the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that a plaintiff/pedestrian’s contributory negligence will not bar his recovery when a motorist negligently strikes the pedestrian.
Toten v. General Motors Corp. 479 So. 2d 957 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Co., Belshe v. Gant, 235 La.
Freeman v. Varnado 480 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985