Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So. 2d 1330.

3491 citing documents.

Ochsner Clinic v. Maxicare Louisiana, Inc. 672 So. 2d 979 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Francis v. Brown 671 So. 2d 1041 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Callihan v. Town of Vinton 668 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Jack v. State ex rel. Department of Health & Human Resources 671 So. 2d 26 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Rowe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 670 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Const. art. 5, Sections 5(C) and 10(B) (La.
STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. v. Schwegmann Westside Expressway, Inc. 669 So. 2d 1172 La. 1996
we held that an appellate court should not upset factual findings of a trial court absent manifest error or unless clearly wrong.
Mahaffey v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 679 So. 2d 129 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Allen v. Rawlins 669 So. 2d 1282 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Banks v. Jefferson Parish School Board 670 So. 2d 1284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Big Easy Roofing Co. v. Faris 671 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Franks v. Air Conditioning Appliance Corp. 670 So. 2d 322 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Rosell, supra; Stobart, supra.
Regan v. Gore 670 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Dubroc v. Dupar 670 So. 2d 349 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Huff v. Union Pacific Railroad 670 So. 2d 444 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
When there is a conflict in the testimony, “reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed on review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable.” Rosell, 549 So.2d at 844
Custis v. Whitaker Const. 670 So. 2d 339 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Succession of Gilbert 668 So. 2d 1212 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Mistich v. Volkswagen of Germany, Inc. 666 So. 2d 1073 La. 1996
Merritt v. Karcioglu 668 So. 2d 469 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Clement v. Frey 666 So. 2d 607 La. 1996
Bannister v. Dept. of Streets 666 So. 2d 641 La. 1996
Hill v. Morehouse Parish Police Jury 666 So. 2d 612 La. 1996
Arceneaux v. Domingue, *615
Milton v. Elmwood Care, Inc. 664 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
Manuel v. Shell Oil Co. 664 So. 2d 470 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
In this regard, the Louisiana Supreme Court has recently stated: this Court held that the court of appeal should not upset the factual findings of a trial court absent manifest error or unless clearly wrong.
Richard v. McCrory Corp. 666 So. 2d 371 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Ramogasse v. Lafitte Welding Works 666 So. 2d 1176 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
Franatovich v. Deep South Trucking, Inc. 665 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Helaire v. Louisiana School for Math, Science & Arts 664 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Rosell, supra; Stobart, supra.
First City Bank v. 740 Esplanade Avenue 665 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Singleton v. Ross 664 So. 2d 1326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Turner v. Dameron-Pierson Co., Ltd. 664 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Bourque v. Koury 664 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Davis v. Jones Baldwin Music Co. 662 So. 2d 803 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
Bigner v. LSU Medical Center, 27,084 (La.App.2d Cir. 6/21/95)
Graham v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 662 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
Hollis v. McDermott, Inc. 663 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
7/5/94), , and Stobart v. State, through Department of Transportation and Development
Oxley v. Sabine River Authority 663 So. 2d 497 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Goodliffe v. Parish Anesthesia Associates 663 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
In Ambrose , the Supreme Court explained: this Court held that the court of appeal should not upset the factual findings of a trial court absent manifest error or unless clearly wrong.
National Tea Co. v. Plymouth Rubber Co. 663 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
7/5/94), , 220: this Court held that the court of appeal should not upset the factual findings of a trial court absent manifest error or unless clearly wrong.
Green v. City of Thibodaux 671 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
wherein it stated that the court of appeal should not upset the factual findings of a trial court absent manifest error or unless clearly wrong.
Cobb v. Kleinpeter 663 So. 2d 236 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Cobb v. Kleinpeter 663 So. 2d 236 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Branch v. City of Lafayette 663 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Olivier v. Allstate Ins. Co. 663 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Hatten v. Price 663 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Bradley v. Morton Thiokol, Inc. 661 So. 2d 691 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
St. Charles Parish School Board v. P & L Investment Corp. 662 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
First Progenitor, LLC v. LAKE FINANCIAL SERV., INC. 662 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
Pattan v. Fields 669 So. 2d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
nd Insurance, 650 So.2d at 746, the Louisiana Supreme Court qualified its opinion in Stobart v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, noting: was not intended to change that synthesis or to make the scope of appellate review of facts any more limited than described in Rosell, Arceneaux [ v. Domingue, ], Canter [ v. Koehring Co., ], et al., supra.
Williams v. Hospital Service, Inc. 663 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
Uriegas v. Gainsco 663 So. 2d 162 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Craft v. Allstate Ins. Co. 663 So. 2d 116 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
(defective ladder); (removal of a safety device); (owner of vehicle with defective brakes).