Cited by

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

3491 citing documents.

Touchet v. Huval 391 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Werner v. Southern Forest Products Assoc. 391 So. 2d 63 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
See Canter v. Koehring Company, La., ; Arceneaux v. Dominque, La., .
Tomeny v. Boykin 391 So. 2d 85 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Arceneaux v. Domingue, La., (1978).
Kirklin v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc. 391 So. 2d 87 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Marks v. Singleton 391 So. 2d 538 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Rushing v. Insurance Co. of North America 391 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Samanie v. Johnston Testers, Inc. 393 So. 2d 209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
y, as follows: *211 “When there is evidence before the trier of fact which, upon its reasonable evaluation of credibility, furnishes a reasonable factual basis for the trial court’s finding, in the following manner: “.
Buckley v. Exxon Corp. 390 So. 2d 512 La. 1980
Bordelon v. Bordelon 390 So. 2d 1325 La. 1980
Hall v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. 390 So. 2d 948 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
Lewis v. Toledo National Insurance Co. 389 So. 2d 1125 La. 1980
This Court cannot determine, from the opinion of the Court of Appeal, , whether the judgment of the trial judge is “clearly wrong.” Arceneaux v, Domingue
Benedic v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 389 So. 2d 871 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Schwindt v. Tonglet 389 So. 2d 883 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
(1973) (1978), the trial judge’s findings of fact will not be disturbed.
Salez v. New Orleans Public Service Inc. 389 So. 2d 895 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Murphy v. DeLatte 389 So. 2d 912 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles v. Rault 389 So. 2d 1373 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
ASHLEY-HALL, ETC. v. Bank of New Orleans 389 So. 2d 850 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
[2] Arceneaux v. Domingue, La., ; Canter v. Koehring Company, La., .
Gasquet v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. 391 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
dealt with factual situations wherein an injured person sought to prove damages from an unreasonable risk of harm to others by an offending instrumentality and declared that once such damages are proven "the owner or guardian responsible for the person or thing can escape liability only if he shows the harm
Prairie Finance, Inc. v. Perry 389 So. 2d 1131 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Higginbotham v. General Motors Corp. 389 So. 2d 800 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
The reason for this well-settled principle of review is based not only upon the trial court’s better capacity to evaluate live witnesses (as compared with the appellate court’s access only to a cold record), but also upon the proper allocation of trial and appellate functions between the respective courts.” the supreme court defined manifestly erroneous as meaning clearly wrong.
Brown v. Farmers Land & Canal Co. 389 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
McMillan v. Travelers Ins.
Richey v. Cagle Chevrolet, Inc. 389 So. 2d 772 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Winegeart v. Texas Industries, Inc. 390 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Johnson v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. 389 So. 2d 1139 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
when the Supreme Court added: "Manifestly erroneous in its simplest terms means clearly wrong .
Pete Roy Ford, Inc. v. Lachney 390 So. 2d 248 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Littles v. Southeastern Fidelity Ins. Co. 398 So. 2d 575 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Little v. Little 391 So. 2d 1213 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
State ex rel. Department of Highways v. Ellender 391 So. 2d 1234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Olinde v. State 391 So. 2d 1243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Fidelity Financial Services, Inc. v. McCoy 392 So. 2d 118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Cangelosi v. SCHWEGMANN BROS., ETC. 390 So. 2d 196 La. 1980
Baltz v. Baltz 389 So. 2d 101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Klumpp v. Colonial Pipeline Co. 389 So. 2d 457 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Artigue v. South Central Bell Tel. Co. 390 So. 2d 211 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Almerico v. Highlands Ins. Co. 388 So. 2d 1176 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
[3] Canter v. Koehring Company, La., ; Arceneaux v. Domingue, La., .
Leon McQueen Lumber Co. v. Baer 391 So. 2d 1198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Davenport v. McCullough Services Baroid Div. 388 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
Cadiere v. West Gibson Products Co., Inc.
Danna v. Howard Griffin, Inc. 388 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
Cadiere v. West Gibson Products Co., Inc.
Lagraize v. New Orleans Armature Works 387 So. 2d 687 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Roussel v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 385 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Napoli v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 387 So. 2d 1351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Dixie Carriers, Inc. v. Otto M. Lipscomb, Inc. 387 So. 2d 1357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Shipp v. City of Alexandria 392 So. 2d 1078 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
we have reviewed the record and find no manifest error in the trial court's holding that the victim was without fault.
Hebert v. Brazzel 393 So. 2d 135 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Am. Eagle, Inc. v. EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY ASSUR. CORP. 389 So. 2d 1339 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
[7] we must affirm the trial judge's decision unless it was "plainly wrong."
Ryan v. Pekinto 387 So. 2d 1325 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS v. LeBlanc 388 So. 2d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Lister v. Texaco, Inc. 389 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
If the Court were to be permitted use of the yard stick, ‘clearly wrong’, as set forth by *729 the Supreme Court in, , in evaluating the findings of the jury, this Court could not say that the jury’s findings were clearly wrong....” We hold there are probative facts of record that reasonably support the jury’s finding and we find no manifest error.
Jordan v. Lloyd 387 So. 2d 1321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Ryan v. Pekinto 387 So. 2d 1325 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by