Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Olsen v. Shell Oil Co., 365 So. 2d 1285.

111 citing documents.

Chaney v. Vaughn 245 So. 3d 1208 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
Olsen v. Shell Oil , (La.
Boutall v. Christakis, P.M., Co. 236 So. 3d 1268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
1983) ; Olsen v. Shell Oil Co. , , 1292 (La.
Falcon v. Surcouf 236 So. 3d 716 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2017
1983) ; Olsen v. Shell Oil Co. , , 1292 (La.
Broussard v. State ex rel. Office of State Buildings 113 So. 3d 175 La. 2013
We have previously stated that “necessary appurtenances to structures and movables made immovable by attachment, which are defective or have fallen into ruin, also may be included within that term ‘building’ for purposes of the building-owner’s delictual responsibility under Article 2322.”
Pearson v. DELAUNE 54 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Church v. Shrell 8 So. 3d 70 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Bridges v. NATIONAL FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, INC. 960 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Palermo v. Port of New Orleans 951 So. 2d 425 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
Palermo v. Port of New Orleans 933 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Miller v. Martin 838 So. 2d 761 La. 2003
See Foster v. Destin Trading Corp., 96-0803 (La.5/30/97), (finding that an owner has a non-delegable duty to maintain a seaworthy vessel); (finding, prior to the 1996 tort reform amendments, that an owner has a non-delegable duty to keep his building and its appurtenances in repair); Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Co-op., Inc., (finding, prior to the 1996 tort reform amendment, that an owner has a non-delegable duty
Hebert v. ANCO Insulation, Inc. 835 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Gorton v. Ouachita Parish Police Jury 814 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
the trial court pointed out that the owner's duty is non-delegable.
Lofton v. Hayward 806 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Entrevia, supra; Loescher v. Parr, supra.
Melerine v. State 773 So. 2d 831 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
Grieff v. Parish of Jefferson 780 So. 2d 425 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
-1289 (La.1978), the supreme court expounded on its explanation in Loescher: “The owner’s fault (under Article 2322) is founded upon the breach of his obligation to maintain or repair his budding so as to avoid the creation of undue risk of injury to others.” (Explanation added.)
Dupre' v. ABC Insurance Co. 776 So. 2d 25 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Kose v. Cablevision of Shreveport 755 So. 2d 1039 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Hunter v. Town of Sibley 745 So. 2d 820 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Penton v. Schuster 732 So. 2d 597 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
Lott v. Lebon 687 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Mix v. Krewe of Petronius 675 So. 2d 792 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Similarly, the duty imposed upon the owner of a building by Civil Code Article 2322 is "non-delegable", -94 (La.1979) and the owner's liability under Civil Code Article 2322 continues even if the building or part of it is leased.
Billiot v. State 654 So. 2d 753 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
it was made clear that the term “building” as used in the Civil Code is broad enough to include oil wells.
Celestine v. Union Oil Co. of California 652 So. 2d 1299 La. 1995
Girvan v. New Orleans Pub. Serv. Inc. 646 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Olivier v. Boudreaux 649 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., supra; Olsen v. Shell Oil Co., supra [ ]; Loescher v. Parr, supra [ ].
Myers v. Burger King Corp. 638 So. 2d 369 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
the Court stated: The fault of a `third person' which exonerates a person from his own obligation imparting strict liability as imposed by Articles 2317, 2321, and 2322 is that which is the sole cause of the damage, of the nature of an irresistible and unforeseeable occurrence i.e., where the damage resulti
Celestine v. Union Oil Co. of California 636 So. 2d 1138 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
Winchell v. Johnson Properties, Inc. 640 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Gaspard v. Pargas of Eunice, Inc., (La.App.
Barnett v. Staats 631 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
Burton v. Housing Authority of New Orleans, Inc. 623 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
Similarly, the duty imposed upon the owner of a building by Civil Code Article 2322 is “non-delegable”, -94 (La.1979), and the owner’s liability under Civil Code Article 2322 continues even if the building or a part of it is leased.
Thibodeau v. Mayor and Councilmen of Morgan City 619 So. 2d 595 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
our supreme court held that a property owner may not transfer garde by contract.
Tillman v. Johnson 610 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
Crane v. Exxon Corp., USA 613 So. 2d 214 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
the Louisiana Supreme Court held that an owner may not divest itself of article 2322 strict liability by attempting to transfer garde by contract.
Desormeaux v. Audubon Ins. Co. 611 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
Hughes v. Green 609 So. 2d 991 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
the Louisiana Supreme Court set out the three requirements which must be met before strict liability under C.C.
Marcantel v. Karam 601 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
Gaspard v. Pargas of Eunice, Inc., (La.App.
Green v. Industrial Helicopters, Inc. 593 So. 2d 634 La. 1992
Hopkins v. Travasos 569 So. 2d 1056 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
Lucas v. Acker 560 So. 2d 74 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Triplette v. Exxon Corp. 554 So. 2d 1361 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Bruyninckx v. Bratten 554 So. 2d 247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Art. 464 states, “Buildings and standing timber are separate im-movables when they belong to a person other than the owner of the ground.” the Louisiana Supreme Court determined that for purposes of LSA-C.C.
Boyer v. Seal 553 So. 2d 827 La. 1989
Distinguished Reilly v. FAIRWAY VIEW II ASSOCIATES LTD. P'SHIP. 544 So. 2d 73 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
4th Cir.1981) as support for their position.
LeBlanc v. Jani-King, Inc. 538 So. 2d 1156 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
which was in response to a certified question from the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals; a superceding, intervening cause is "the sole `legal' cause or `responsible' cause, as distinguished from a `cause-in-fact'"...
9 to 5 Fashions, Inc. v. Spurney 538 So. 2d 228 La. 1989
207 (La.1922); Weber v. Fidelity and Casualty Ins.
Griffin v. Foti 523 So. 2d 935 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Gaspard v. Pargas of Eunice, Inc. 527 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Moon v. City of Baton Rouge 522 So. 2d 117 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
White v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 525 So. 2d 145 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Bowles v. Litton Industries, Inc. 518 So. 2d 1070 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987