DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., 376 So. 2d 500.

27 citing documents.

  • Quality Paint Hardware & Marine Supply Inc. v. Crescent Coating & Services, Inc. 123 So. 3d 780 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    art. 2085 provides, in pertinent 17part, that, “An appeal cannot be taken by a party who confessed judgment in the proceedings in the trial court or who voluntarily and unconditionally acquiesced in a judgment rendered against him.” Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Trahan v. COCO COLA BOTTLING CO. UNITED 894 So. 2d 1096 La. 2005
    [5] This court used similar reasoning in Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., a workers' compensation case that arose prior to the 1999 amendment to La.
  • Stogner v. Stogner 739 So. 2d 762 La. 1999
    See Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., (La.App.
  • Executive Chiropractic Services v. Louisiana Workers' Compensation Corp. 727 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., (La.
  • Distinguished Sanders v. Harrisonburg Nursing Home 657 So. 2d 394 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
    Ms. Sanders relies heavily on Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., [1]
  • Matchmaker International of New Orleans, Inc. v. Osborne 653 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
    5th Cir.1984); Martin, [v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., ], supra.
  • Price v. City of New Orleans 637 So. 2d 452 La. 1994
    See Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Price v. City of New Orleans 637 So. 2d 452 La. 1994
    See Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Price v. City of New Orleans 632 So. 2d 836 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    The above provision was applied to a worker’s compensation case by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Pourciau v. Pourciau 624 So. 2d 23 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    art. 2085; Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • McNeer Elec. Contracting, Inc. v. CRL, INC. 621 So. 2d 99 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
    See Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., (La.App.
  • Succession of Morvant 578 So. 2d 549 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
    In Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., the Supreme Court implied that it would have considered the rejection of the consent judgment had the employer's attorney objected on record to the provisions of the judgment or had he moved for a new trial.
  • Jones v. Gillen 564 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
    Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Hicks v. Hicks 561 So. 2d 188 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    art. 2085; Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Olivier v. Comeaux 498 So. 2d 1135 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    Martin v. Holzer *1137 Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Seals v. Pittman 499 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Collins v. Collins 485 So. 2d 956 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
    4th Cir. 1980) and Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., "
  • LRH, Inc. v. Tiller 478 So. 2d 630 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    In Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., 3 the supreme court held a confession of judgment precluding an appeal must consist of an admission by a party in the proceedings in the trial court of the validity of his opponent’s claim in such a way as to leave no issue to be tried.
  • Hill v. Hill 471 So. 2d 1130 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
    4th Cir.1980) and Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Troxclair v. Parish of St. Charles 450 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
    Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Colbert v. Louisiana State Univ. Dental Sch. 446 So. 2d 1204 La. 1984
    In support of his argument that a binding compromise was effected, defendant cites this Court's decision in Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Nguyen v. Lengsfield Bros., Inc. 417 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    Defendant argues that Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Wks., Inc., held the parties to a workers’ compensation case bound by their oral consent at trial time to a judgment thereafter entered, and that the writing requirement of C.C.
  • Kleiner v. Ciko 417 So. 2d 54 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    In Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., the court said: "A confession of judgment precluding an appeal need not be in writing or in a particular form.
  • CCH, INC. v. Heard 410 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
    Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Davis v. Hooker Chemical & Plastic Corp. 394 So. 2d 802 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    We conclude that this case is controlled by the principles announced in the case of Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
  • Bourgeois v. Franklin 389 So. 2d 358 La. 1980
    Plaintiff further contends that the Court of Appeal erred in relying on Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., in granting defendants' motion.
  • Armstrong v. Armstrong 384 So. 2d 566 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
    In Martin v. Holzer Sheet Metal Works, Inc., La., , the court held that a confession of judgment will preclude an appeal if it consists of an admission by a party in the trial court of the validity of his opponent’s claim in such a way as to leave no issue to be tried.