Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Reck v. Stevens, 373 So. 2d 498.

1552 citing documents.

Bauer v. White 532 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Street v. Equitable Petroleum Corp. 532 So. 2d 887 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Aikens v. State Farm Insurance 532 So. 2d 554 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Highlands Ins. Co. v. Missouri Pacific RR Co. 532 So. 2d 317 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Allen v. State 535 So. 2d 903 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Kuck v. City of New Orleans 531 So. 2d 1142 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Eskine v. Regional Transit Authority 531 So. 2d 1159 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Shortess v. Touro Infirmary 535 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Johnson v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. 531 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., supra; Alexander v. Leger, supra.
K-Oil Rental & Supply, Inc. v. Town of Gueydan 535 So. 2d 427 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Redondo v. CONSOL. FREIGHTWAYS CORP. OF DELAWARE 529 So. 2d 1296 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Gotro v. Town of Melville 527 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Vidrine v. Government Employees Ins. Co. 528 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Moreau v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 527 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Prince v. Conoco, Inc. 529 So. 2d 39 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Moreau v. STATE EX REL. DOTD 527 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Lasswell v. Matlack, Inc. 527 So. 2d 1199 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
stated: "Before a trial court award may be questioned as inadequate or excessive, the reviewing court must look first, not to prior awards, but to the individual circumstances of the present case.
Harris v. Wright Furniture of Gonzales 527 So. 2d 1063 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Landry v. State Farm Ins. Co. 529 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Gaspard v. LeMaire, 245 La.
Wilson v. Cline 527 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Red v. Taravella 530 So. 2d 1186 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Goodwin v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. 530 So. 2d 1218 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Cascio v. City of Monroe 530 So. 2d 1170 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Koury v. Lanier Exp., Inc. 528 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Coco, supra; Freeman v. Harold Dickey Transport, Inc., (La.App.
Clement v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 528 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Adams v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. 525 So. 2d 1211 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
CLEMENT III v. Armoniet 527 So. 2d 1004 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
art. 1934(3) we are accordingly ever mindful that our initial inquiry must always be directed at whether the trial court's award for the particular injuries and their effects upon this particular injured person is a clear abuse of the trier of fact's "much discretion."
Seaberry v. Smith 527 So. 2d 1011 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Amedee v. Cruse 526 So. 2d 433 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
The standard for appellate review of the amount of a : Before a trial court award may be questioned as inadequate or excessive, the reviewing court must look first, not to prior awards, but to the individual circumstances of the present case.
Hicks v. Barney 526 So. 2d 391 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Meshell v. Shamsie 528 So. 2d 1023 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
On the issue of general damages we recognize the general rule of appellate review first espoused by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., as follows: "We do re-emphasize, however, that before a Court of Appeal can disturb an award made by a trial court that the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award.
Winstead v. Watson 528 So. 2d 691 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Notto v. Brown 525 So. 2d 251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Aucoin v. Mc B R Management Co. 525 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
be considered either excessive, or insufficient.”
Calloway v. City of New Orleans 524 So. 2d 182 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Richard v. STATE, DEPT. OF HEALTH & HUMAN RES. 526 So. 2d 1237 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Keyworth v. Southern Baptist Hospitals, Inc. 524 So. 2d 56 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Art. 2324.1 (pre-1984 Art. 1934(3))
Raymond v. Safeway Stores, Inc. 522 So. 2d 1350 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Snyder v. Taylor 523 So. 2d 1348 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Moon v. City of Baton Rouge 522 So. 2d 117 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Dill v. DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. 522 So. 2d 1288 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Tracy v. Jefferson Parish 523 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Lewis v. MacKe Bldg. Services, Inc. 524 So. 2d 16 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Here, the inquiry is whether the trier of fact abused his much discretion in fixing this award, Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., *22 (La.1977)
Pattison v. BF Goodrich Co. 522 So. 2d 1212 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Coleman v. State, Through DOTD 524 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Bradford v. Pias 525 So. 2d 134 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Conner v. Motel 6, Inc. 521 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., supra
Thomas v. Malbreaux 525 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
This court in Franklin said: “ upon appellate review we may not disturb an award of general damages made at the trial court level without a finding of clear abuse of discretion and then only after abuse is shown through an articulated analysis and for articulated reasons.
Zeagler v. Dillard Dept. Stores, Inc. 521 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Harkness v. Porter 521 So. 2d 832 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988