Cited by

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

1552 citing documents.

Williams v. Jones 405 So. 2d 1312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
D'Angelo v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 405 So. 2d 1262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Alexander v. Terry 405 So. 2d 1298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Guillory v. Texas Petro Gas Co. 405 So. 2d 607 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.App.
Hickman v. Miller 405 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston, Inc., Boustany v. Fluid Dynamics, supra; Mid-State Homes
Deblieux v. PS & Sons Painting, Inc. 405 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Paige v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America 404 So. 2d 1319 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
239 , (1963), through Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., we deem our responsibility on this appeal is “.
Wattigny v. Lambert 408 So. 2d 1126 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
The Louisiana Supreme Court, reiterated the methodology to be utilized by the appellate courts of this State in reviewing general damage awards made by a trial court.
Venable v. Credeur 404 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Scheer v. Pat O'Brien's Bar, Inc. 404 So. 2d 292 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
as authority for rejecting defendant’s argument that the award constituted an abuse of the jury’s discretion.
Hardy v. State, Through Dept. of Highways 404 So. 2d 981 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Parish v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 404 So. 2d 996 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Knockum v. Amoco Oil Company 402 So. 2d 90 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Levesque v. Saba 402 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Pardee v. Bituminous Insurance 401 So. 2d 1067 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
$ 1,936.75 The Court also makes the following awards: Loss of wages, use of sick leave $1,365.60 Loss of use of vehicle 500.00 General damages, pain and suffering, loss of hearing 50,000.00” and find no abuse of discretion by the trial judge.
Brasseaux v. Stand-By Corp. 402 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Autin v. Allstate Ins. Co. 402 So. 2d 219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Burns v. Fernandez 401 So. 2d 1033 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Garrison v. State, Through Dept. of Highways 401 So. 2d 528 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1981
Discussing appellate review of general damage awards, stated: "...
Chaudoir v. Theriot 400 So. 2d 730 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Doty v. Safeco Ins. Co. 400 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Pierrotti v. Associated Indem. Corp. 399 So. 2d 679 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Hill v. Smith 399 So. 2d 708 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Locicero v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co. 399 So. 2d 712 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
the Louisiana Supreme Court 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.
Thomasson v. AK DURNIN CHRYSLER-PLY., INC. 399 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Morales v. Magnolia Chemicals & Solvents, Inc. 399 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Smith v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. 399 So. 2d 1193 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Provost v. A. E. Gravois & Sons, Inc. 398 So. 2d 1287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
When do awards in other possibly similar, reported cases properly aid (or erroneously mislead) an appellate court in determining whether there has been an abuse of discretion by a given judge or jury?” Thereafter, for further elaboration and guidance in the methodology for appellate review, quoted the following from the Coco decision, supra: “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
Parker v. Travelers Ins. Co. 400 So. 2d 682 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Hill v. Murco, Inc. 398 So. 2d 1211 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Bush v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF HWYS. 395 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1981
Faulk v. Cagle Supply, Inc. 399 So. 2d 1186 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Neville v. Johnson 398 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Clement v. Marion Corp. 398 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Celestine v. Great Southern Oil & Gas Co. 398 So. 2d 195 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Holland v. First Nat. Bank of Crowley 398 So. 2d 186 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Mullin v. Vessier 400 So. 2d 1192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
the Louisiana Supreme Court 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 *1194 of the present case.
Campbell v. Dolci 400 So. 2d 1087 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Cappo v. Vinson Guard Service, Inc. 400 So. 2d 1148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Kollet v. Baggot 400 So. 2d 1085 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Vega v. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. 401 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Kostrzewa v. Wilson 397 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Ferguson v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. 398 So. 2d 72 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
and Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., (La.
Moraus v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. 396 So. 2d 596 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Coco Industries, (La.App.
Dickson v. State Farm Insurance Agency 396 So. 2d 514 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
on page 500 where the Court stated: “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.
Vallot v. Camco, Inc. 396 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Hebert v. Schwegmann Bros. Giant Supermarkets, Inc. 396 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
further stated that an articulated analysis of the facts must show a clear abuse of discretion before it can disturb the award.
Steib v. Schwegmann Bros. Giant Supermarkets, Inc. 396 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
wherein it stated, at 501: "Thus, the initial inquiry must always be directed at whether the trier 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," La.Civ.C.
Kraaz v. La Quinta Motor Inns, Inc. 396 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Walton v. William Wolf Baking Co. 396 So. 2d 962 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981