DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Ins. Co., 388 So. 2d 707.

157 citing documents.

  • Cheramie v. Brunet 510 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Givens v. F.W. Woolworth Co. 508 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Kyle v. City of Bogalusa 506 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, *729
  • Hill v. Lamulle 506 So. 2d 690 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
    wherein the court stated: "[1] Where a finding of fact is interdicted because of some legal error implicit in the fact finding process or when a mistake of law forecloses any finding of fact, and where the record is otherwise complete, the appellate court should, if it can, render judgment on the record
  • AF Blair Co., Inc. v. Haydel 504 So. 2d 1044 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Royer v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 502 So. 2d 232 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
    is cited for the proposition that a remand would be required because the record is incomplete due to prejudicial evidentiary rulings by the trial court and the denial of amendments.
  • Tabor v. Doctors Memorial Hosp. 501 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    our Supreme Court expresses the applicable principles as follows: Where a finding of fact is interdicted because of some legal error implicit in the fact finding process or when a mistake of law forecloses any finding of fact, and where the record is otherwise complete, the appellate court should, if it can
  • Lewis v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. 499 So. 2d 656 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Insurance Co., et al
  • McCoin v. McGehee 498 So. 2d 272 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • McLean v. Hunter 495 So. 2d 1298 La. 1986
  • Ryland v. LAW FIRM OF TAYLOR, PORTER, BROOKS & PHILLIPS 496 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Eldridge v. Downtowner Hotel 492 So. 2d 64 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
  • Gagnet v. Zummo 487 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
  • Picou v. Ferrara 483 So. 2d 915 La. 1986
  • Marshall v. Beno Truck Equipment, Inc. 481 So. 2d 1022 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Co., Dawson v. Mazda Motors of America, Inc., et al, (La.
  • Lee v. K-Mart Corp. 483 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    It should be noted that Miller predates Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Insurance *621 Company, which will be discussed hereinafter.
  • Freeman v. Varnado 480 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
  • Collins v. Christophe 479 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • Varnado v. Sanders 477 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • Hasapis v. Centanni 476 So. 2d 20 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
    cited Gonzales favorably and stated: “Where a finding of fact is interdicted because of some legal error implicit in *21 the fact finding process or when a mistake of law forecloses any finding of fact, and where the record is otherwise complete, the appellate court should, if it can, render judgment on the
  • Fontenot v. Hanover Ins. Co. 473 So. 2d 145 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
  • Dawson v. Mazda Motors of America, Inc. 475 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    appears the following: Where a finding of fact is interdicted because of some legal error implicit in the fact finding process or when a mistake of law forecloses any finding of fact, and where the record is otherwise complete, the appellate court should, if it can, render judgment on the record.
  • Mitchell v. Windham 469 So. 2d 381 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
  • Turner v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America 472 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    Co., the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: Where a finding of fact is interdicted because of some legal error implicit in the fact finding process or when a mistake of law forecloses any finding of fact, and where the record is otherwise complete, the appellate court should, if it can, render judgment on the
  • Thomas v. Missouri Pacific RR Co. 466 So. 2d 1280 La. 1985
  • Arledge v. Bell 463 So. 2d 856 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • Otto v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 455 So. 2d 1175 La. 1984
  • Mara v. Mara 452 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
    Co., American Machinery Movers, Inc. v. Continental Container Service, Inc., (La.
  • Fritscher v. Chateau Golf & Country Club 453 So. 2d 964 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
    Clarifying this rule, states: Where a finding of fact is interdicted because of some legal error implicit in the fact finding process or when a mistake of law forecloses any finding of fact, and where the record is otherwise complete, the appellate court should, if it can, render judgment on the record.
  • Boudreaux v. Exxon Co., USA 451 So. 2d 85 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
  • Brewington v. Louisiana Dept. of Corrections 447 So. 2d 1184 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
    Co., Burns v. Lamar-Lane Chevrolet, Inc., (La.App.
  • Smith v. State Farm Insurance Co. 446 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
    Co., which held: Gonzales should not be read to require, that the appellate court must find its own facts in every such case.
  • Landry v. St. Charles Inn, Inc. 446 So. 2d 1246 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
    Co., American Machinery Movers, Inc. v. Continental Container Service, Inc., (La.App.
  • Gibbens Pools, Inc. v. Corrington 446 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
  • Landry v. Bill Garrett Chevrolet, Inc. 443 So. 2d 1139 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
  • Poynor v. Cure 443 So. 2d 1151 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
  • Sims v. CRC Holston, Inc. 442 So. 2d 646 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • Bossier v. Desoto General Hosp. 442 So. 2d 485 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
  • Ketcher v. Illinois Central Gulf R. Co. 440 So. 2d 805 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • Amer. MacH. Movers v. Continental Container 436 So. 2d 1289 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
    Co., it was held that "...
  • Landry v. Bill Garrett Chevrolet, Inc. 430 So. 2d 1051 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
  • RTL CORP. v. Manufacturer's Enterprises, Inc. 429 So. 2d 855 La. 1983
  • Steinbach v. Barfield 428 So. 2d 915 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • Andrews v. Pine Hill Wood Co. 426 So. 2d 196 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
    Co., (2) Dr. Hull's expertise is of an unusual nature in that he is the only such specialist in northeast Louisiana; (3) this litigation is already unusually protracted as can be seen from our recitation of facts in the original opinion; and most importantly, (4) this is a compensation case in which there are no
  • Smith v. Travelers Ins. Co. 418 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
    Co., La., ; and prior cases to the same effect cited in Gonzales .
  • Vincent v. Vincent 420 So. 2d 1333 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
  • Phillips v. Skate Country East 420 So. 2d 730 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
    3rd Cir.1982), the court discussed the standard for granting a new trial at pp. 1351: "The standard for granting a new trial in such cases was considered by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, supra
  • Broussard v. Texas Industries, Inc. 416 So. 2d 1349 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    The standard for granting a new trial in such cases was considered by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Xerox Corporation, supra
  • Franklin v. Holiday Restaurant 420 So. 2d 477 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    1975), rehearing denied October 6, 1980, this court awards claimant-appellant the following sums for the stated reasons: 1.
  • Scholegel v. Robinson 416 So. 2d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
    merely discuss the substantive legal issue of the standard to be utilized after a motion for a directed verdict is properly before the court.