Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., 387 So. 2d 585.

130 citing documents.

Williams v. Exxon Corp. 541 So. 2d 910 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Prather v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., Inc. 526 So. 2d 1325 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Co., Chappuis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 358 So.
Gaspard v. Pargas of Eunice, Inc. 527 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., *30
Stoute v. South Carolina Insurance Co. 524 So. 2d 879 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Bowles v. Litton Industries, Inc. 518 So. 2d 1070 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.App.
Felice v. Valleylab, Inc. 520 So. 2d 920 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Chappuis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Weber v. Fidelity & Casualty Ins.
Silliker v. St. Landry Police Jury 520 So. 2d 880 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.
Brown v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. 514 So. 2d 439 La. 1987
LAW In Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., the space at the side of a store's moving escalator tended to trap small tennis shoes, in part because the friction of the treads softened the rubber of the shoes.
Bloxom v. Bloxom 512 So. 2d 839 La. 1987
Chappuis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Weber v. Fidelity & Casualty Ins.
Madden v. Saik 511 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Dalton v. Breaux 510 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
See Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Toups v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., Inc. 507 So. 2d 809 La. 1987
Brown v. Sears Roebuck & Co. 503 So. 2d 1122 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
In granting plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict, and Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., and, (La.App.
Whittle v. MILLER ELECTRICAL MFG. CO. 507 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
1981); Chappuis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Weber v. Fidelity & Casualty Ins.
LeBleu v. Homelite Div. of Textron, Inc. 509 So. 2d 563 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
1981); Chappuis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Weber v. Fidelity & Casualty Ins.
Sellers v. Caddo Parish Com'n 503 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
Ross v. La Coste De Monterville 502 So. 2d 1026 La. 1987
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Short v. Otis Elevator Co. 502 So. 2d 1100 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
The standard of proof in products liability cases was set forth in Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., at page 589: Thus, under Weber [1] , the plaintiff in a products liability suit must only prove *1102 that the product was defective, i.e., unreasonably dangerous to normal use; that the product was in normal use at the time the injury occurred; that the product's defect caused his injury; and that the injur
Gallagher v. Favrot 499 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.
Dean v. Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal Dist. 496 So. 2d 1352 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Strickland v. Fowler 499 So. 2d 199 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
[2] and Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Co-Op., Inc. 496 So. 2d 275 La. 1986
The "likelihood and gravity of harm" of the escalator in Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., rendered the escalator unreasonably dangerous to children wearing soft rubber soled shoes.
Valentine v. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. 494 So. 2d 1309 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Bradford v. CONSOLIDATED AMERICAN INS. CO. 493 So. 2d 895 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
McCormick v. Insured Lloyds Ins. Co. 488 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Spencer v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 488 So. 2d 1116 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., Carter v. Board of Supervisors of La.
May v. Lafayette Parish Police Jury 487 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.
Wood v. Cambridge Mut. Fire Ins. Co. 486 So. 2d 1129 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
1983); Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Thompson v. Tuggle 486 So. 2d 144 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
The judicial process involved in deciding whether a risk is unreasonable under *150 Article 2317 is similar to that employed in determining whether a risk is unreasonable in a traditional negligence problem, and in deciding the scope of duty or legal cause under the duty/risk analysis.
Joseph v. Bohn Ford, Inc. 483 So. 2d 934 La. 1986
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Halphen v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. 484 So. 2d 110 La. 1986
Landry v. State 483 So. 2d 162 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Specifically, they contend first, that the presence of the hole did not cause Landry’s injury because he did not actually step into it, and second the hole did not present an unreasonable risk of harm, and Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Marshall v. Beno Truck Equipment, Inc. 481 So. 2d 1022 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
(citing Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., as a traditional negligence case); (La.App.
LaJaunie v. METRO. PROPERTY & LIABILITY INS. CO. 481 So. 2d 1357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.
Bergeron v. Amerada Hess Corp. 478 So. 2d 1308 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
"However, in Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., this court held that the owner of a department store was not entitled to indemnity (as opposed to contribution) from the manufacturer of an escalator, on which the claimant was injured when his foot became stuck in an opening, because the owner did not show `some greater fault' on the part of the manufactur
Jackson v. JI Case, Inc. 473 So. 2d 359 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., rehearing denied, September 12, 1980."
Lanclos v. Rockwell Intern. Corp. 470 So. 2d 924 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
The judicial process involved in deciding whether a risk is unreasonable under Article 2317 is similar to that employed in determining whether a risk is unreasonable in a traditional negligence problem, and in deciding the scope of duty or legal cause under the duty/risk analysis.
Golden v. Madden Contracting Co., Inc. 469 So. 2d 1039 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., and in deciding the scope of duty or legal cause under the duty/risk analysis.
Gaudet v. G.D.C., Inc. 477 So. 2d 731 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
See also Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
C & v. GRAVEL, INC. v. MacO Const. Corp. 465 So. 2d 938 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
See Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, Div. of Ervin Industries 462 So. 2d 166 La. 1985
1981); Chappuis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Weber v. Fidelity & Casualty Ins.
Miller v. Upjohn Co. 465 So. 2d 42 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
[2] This is actually the basis for the result reached in Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.
McCart v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. 460 So. 2d 1104 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., and in deciding the scope of duty or legal cause under the duty/risk analysis.
Carter v. Bd. of Sup'rs of Louisiana St. Univ. 459 So. 2d 1263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Distinguished Dusenbery v. McMoRan Exploration Co. 458 So. 2d 102 La. 1984
[4] This case is distinguishable from Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., in which the operator of a department store that contained an escalator with an unreasonably dangerous condition was denied indemnity against the elevator manufacturer.
Thompson v. Ewin 457 So. 2d 303 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
Ponder v. Groendyke Transport, Inc. 454 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., (La.
Quattlebaum v. Hy-Reach Equipment Inc. 453 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
In Hunt v. City Stores, Inc., the court followed the Weber rule and characterized it as "a rule of strict liability for manufacturers of defective products".
Horne v. Liberty Furniture Co. 452 So. 2d 204 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
599 , (1971); Hunt v. City Stores, Inc.
LeRay v. St. Paul Fire and Marine 444 So. 2d 1252 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984