Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Duer & Taylor v. BLANCHARD, WALKER, ETC., 354 So. 2d 192.

29 citing documents.

Ike Spears v. William W. Hall La. 2026
2d 641; Duer and Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin and Roberts, (La.
State Of Louisiana, Ex R El. Justin Dale Tureau Vs. La. 2022
Rather, it is “well settled that prescription is stricti juris and the statutes on the subject cannot be extended from one action to another, nor to analogous cases beyond the strict letter of the law.” Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin & Roberts, (La.
Louisiana State University System Board of Supervisors Through Louisiana State University Veterinarian Teaching Hospital v. Robert Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
3 Cir. 4/30/08), (quoting Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts, (citations omitted).
Roy Raspanti v. E. John Litchfield and Berrigan Litchfield, Schonekas, Mann, Traina and Thompson, L.L.C. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
It is not a suit for recovery of attorney’s fees.” Id., at 509-10 (citing Duer and Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin and Roberts, (La.
Alvin J. Chaisson v. Colby Garrett Broussard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
The “character of an action given by a plaintiff in his pleadings determines the prescription applicable to it.” Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O' Quin & Roberts
McClellan v. Premier Nissan, L.L.C. 167 So. 3d 934 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin & Roberts, Federal Insurance Co. v. Insurance Company of North America, 262 La.
Murray v. Harang 104 So. 3d 694 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
In Scurto v. Siegrist, the Court stated as follows: The agreement between plaintiff and defendant was one confected between two professionals and we will not assume the |9position of dictating to attorneys in a Duer [& Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin & Roberts, ] situation exactly how much work they need perform to entitle them to a certain fee.
Chimneywood Homeowners Ass'n v. Eagan Insurance Agency, Inc. 57 So. 3d 1142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Williams v. EARL K. LONG MEDICAL CENTER 40 So. 3d 412 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
Duer & Taylor v. \J3 Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin and Roberts
Inez R. Strahan v. Sabine Retirement & Rehabilitation Center, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
4 O’Quin & Roberts, (citations omitted).
Strahan v. SABINE RETIREMENT & REHAB. CENT. 981 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts, (citations omitted).
Qayyum v. MOREHOUSE GENERAL HOSP. 874 So. 2d 371 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
In Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that where an attorney retained in a case retains another attorney to assist him, the agreement constitutes a joint venture or partnership with respect to division of the fee.
Fox v. Heisler 874 So. 2d 932 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
citing Duer and Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin and Roberts
Barham & Arceneaux v. Kozak 874 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
[11] See Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts, -95 (La.
Dukes v. Matheny 878 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
See Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin & Roberts, -195 (La.1978).
Hanks v. COLUMBIA WOMEN'S AND CHILD. HOSP. 865 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts
Parry v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund 828 So. 2d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
841 , (1958), and Duer and Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O’Quin and Roberts, the Class contends that the Louisiana Supreme Court has twice decided under factually analogous contractual relationships that a ten-year, not a three-year, |sprescriptive period applies.
Warner v. Carimi Law Firm 725 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
Rather the instant situation is more analogous to that in Duer and Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin and Roberts, , (La.
Rice v. Cummings 716 So. 2d 8 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
4 Cir. 11/22/96) , and on a decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court
Robinson v. Thornton 705 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts
Acadia Holiness Ass'n v. IMC CORP. 616 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, etc.
Scurto v. Siegrist 598 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts
Wonycott v. Southern Business MacHines 595 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts
Bunge Corp. v. Gatx Corp. 557 So. 2d 1376 La. 1990
Duer v. Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, "
Starns v. Emmons 538 So. 2d 275 La. 1989
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts, Federal Insurance Co. v. Insurance Company of North America, 262 La.
Starns v. Emmons 524 So. 2d 251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, etc., Federal Insurance Co. v. Insurance Co. of No. Amer., 262 La.
ACADEMY PAfRK IMP. ASS'N v. City of New Orleans 469 So. 2d 2 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, (La.
Jenkins v. Ouachita Parish School Bd. 459 So. 2d 143 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
[2] Defendants argue that regardless of how the petition is couched, plaintiffs are in essence seeking to overturn the board's action and as such suit had to be brought within the delay provided for in 17:416 C. In the case of Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, Etc., the supreme court set out the rules for determining the applicable prescriptive period as follows: Louisiana jurisprudence is well settled that the character of an action given by a plaintiff in his pleadings determines the pre
Northcott Exploration Co. v. WR Grace & Co. 430 So. 2d 1077 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
See Duer & Taylor v. Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin & Roberts, and authorities cited therein.