DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Rue v. State, Dept. of Highways, 372 So. 2d 1197.

130 citing documents.

  • Bethea v. La. Dept. of Transp. & Development 415 So. 2d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    Rue v. State, Department of Highways, (La.
  • Ishee v. State, Through Dept. of Transp. 413 So. 2d 1362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
  • McLeod v. Parish of East Baton Rouge 414 So. 2d 1341 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
  • Smith v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 412 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    2d Cir. 1979); writ denied Rue v. State, Department of Highways, (La.App.
  • Smith v. STATE, THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSP., ETC. 412 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1982
    2d Cir. 1979); writ denied Rue v. State, Department of Highways, (La.App.
  • Toups v. L. H. Bossier, Inc. 410 So. 2d 1207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    the Department’s duty was extended to include persons who drive onto the shoulder inadvertently where there was neither knowledge nor reason to know of either a defective condition of the shoulder or any other defective condition that would make such action hazardous.
  • Bacile v. Parish of Jefferson 411 So. 2d 1088 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
    Rue v. State, Dept. of Hwys., (La.App.
  • Otzenberger v. Atlas Construction Co. 408 So. 2d 363 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    Rue v. State, Department of Highways, (La.App.
  • LeBlanc v. STATE, LA. DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS 405 So. 2d 635 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    1980); Rue v. State, Department of Highways, (La.App.
  • Oliver v. Capitano 405 So. 2d 1102 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
    1979, , is applicable here.
  • Swanson v. Estate of Augusta 403 So. 2d 118 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
    The case of Rue v. State, Department of Highways, is also noteworthy for purposes of analysis of the present case: "Under a simple `but-for' analysis the accident would not have occurred had either the Highway Department not been negligent in failing to maintain the shoulder or the plaintiff not been negligent (and for present purposes we assume her
  • Edwards v. State, Dept. of Transp. & Devel. 403 So. 2d 109 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    NOTES [1] In so holding, the trial judge relied on Rue v. State, Department of Highways, the leading case at the time.
  • Acosta v. State, Department of Highways 399 So. 2d 1189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    Frey relies on the following language in Rue v. State, Dept. of Highways, : “A motorist has a right to assume that a highway shoulder, the function of which is to accommodate motor vehicles intentionally or unintentionally driven thereon, is maintained in a reasonably safe condition.
  • McDaniel v. State, Dept. of Transp. & Dev. 398 So. 2d 88 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    The court in Rue v. State, Department of Highways, stated that a motorist's duty to drive reasonably does not extend to the risk of injury from striking an unexpected and unexpectable hazard resulting from a negligently maintained highway shoulder.
  • Shipp v. City of Alexandria 395 So. 2d 727 La. 1981
  • Godwin v. Government Employees Ins. Co. 394 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    In spite of this conclusion, the trial judge, on remand, (La.App.
  • LeJeune v. Braswell 394 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    Rue v. State, Department of Highways
  • Sibley v. Menard 398 So. 2d 590 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    On appeal, Menard relies upon Rue v. State, Department of Highways
  • Maxwell v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP., ETC. 391 So. 2d 1230 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    This case, like Rue v. State, Department of Highways, presents primarily the issue of whether a motorist who inadvertently drives off the paved portion of a state highway onto the shoulder, and who thereby loses control of her vehicle due to the condition of the roadway and shoulder, is barred from recovery for her injuries.
  • St. Pierre v. Washofsky 391 So. 2d 78 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
    See Rue v. State, Dept. Hwys.
  • Sinitiere v. Lavergne 391 So. 2d 821 La. 1980
    At issue in this case is whether the Court's decision in Rue v. State, Department of Highways, (La.
  • Followed Domingo v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation 388 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    Nevertheless the conclusion is unassailable that the accident would not have happened if the road had smooth shoulders at the same level as the concrete road, as apparently required by Rue v. State, Dept. Hwys., La.1979, , which we follow in affirming the judgment appealed from.
  • Besnard v. Department of Highways 381 So. 2d 1303 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
    That the way is reasonably safe for travel and free from defects and unlawful obstructions; (b) That those charged with the duty of keeping it so have exercised a proper degree of diligence in so doing; (c) That it will not be obstructed unlawfully or in such a manner as to cause an injury to him while he is in the exercise of due and reasonable care; * * *.'" In Rue v. State, Dept. of Highways, the Court said: "Under a simple `but-for' analysis the accident would not have occurred had either th
  • Sinitiere v. Lavergne 381 So. 2d 522 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    FORET, Judge, concurring: I reluctantly concur for two reasons: (1) while I find it difficult to vote in favor of the reversal of the trial court, and allow recovery to Gerald Lavergne, a dissent would cause a five-judge re-argument, which I would rather avoid, and (2) for the reason that although I disagree with the case of Rue v. State of Louisiana, Department of Highways, we are nevertheless bound by it.
  • Sullivan v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 382 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    The plaintiff urges that the case of Rue v. State, Department of Highways, should allow him to recover in this case.
  • Wall v. American Employers Ins. Co. 377 So. 2d 369 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
    Tammany Parish Police Jury, Rue v. State, Dept. of Highways
  • Brummerloh v. Firemen's Ins. Co. of Newark 377 So. 2d 1301 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    Rue v. State, Department of Highways, "
  • Rue v. State, Dept. of Highways 376 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    This matter comes before us on remand by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Patricia C. Rue and Lloyd Rue, Jr. v. State of Louisiana, Department of Highways
  • Rodgers v. State, Dept. of Highways 376 So. 2d 1295 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1979
    Rue v. State, Department of Highways
  • Brown v. Louisiana Dept. of Highways 373 So. 2d 605 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
    Rue v. State, Department of Highways