Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Campbell v. Mouton, 373 So. 2d 237.

131 citing documents.

Brown v. Soupenne 416 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
Semien v. PPG Industries, Inc. 413 So. 2d 956 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Bradley v. Hunter 413 So. 2d 674 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Pellerin v. Tudor Const. Co. 414 So. 2d 403 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Guillory v. Avondale Shipyard, Inc. 414 So. 2d 799 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
1st Cir. 1981); (La.App.
Campbell v. Mouton 412 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Schielder v. Schwegmann Bros. Giant Supermarkets, Inc. 411 So. 2d 1220 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
Tirante v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 412 So. 2d 128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
The standard for granting a (La.App.
Burrell v. Kirkpatrick 410 So. 2d 1255 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Art. 1810(A) in a (La.App.
Tilley v. Mount Vernon Ins. Co. 411 So. 2d 72 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Gordon v. National Union Fire Insurance 411 So. 2d 1094 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Lacombe v. Greathouse 407 So. 2d 1346 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
DIRECTED VERDICT The standard for determining the propriety of granting a (La.App.
Dillon v. Hospital Affiliates of Baton Rouge 407 So. 2d 493 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
The court may then determine the facts and render judgment against the plaintiff and in favor of the moving party or may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence.” *495 The courts have considered this statutory provision and adopted a standard 2 (La.App.
Pete v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 402 So. 2d 807 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
our brethren on the Third Circuit bench stated: “Making credibility evaluations is one of the primary duties of a jury and the trial court may not take this duty from the jury unless the party opposing the directed verdict has failed to produce sufficient evidence upon which reasonable and fair-mind
Gunter v. Plauche 399 So. 2d 727 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Sanders v. Stutes 400 So. 2d 1159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
In explaining the standard for consideration of defendants' motion, (La.App.
Breithaupt v. Houston General Ins. Co. 398 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Guillory v. Buller 398 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Grimes v. Stander 394 So. 2d 1332 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
The background and principles for application of that paragraph of art. 1810 from which we quote: "Moreover, since the source of LSA-C.
Bryan v. Varnado 394 So. 2d 1321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
McClinton v. Reid 391 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
The applicable standard in granting a motion for a (La.App.
Heatly v. Dolese Ready-Mix Concrete Co. 393 So. 2d 750 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Breithaupt v. Sellers 390 So. 2d 870 La. 1980
Benedic v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 389 So. 2d 871 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Littles v. Southeastern Fidelity Ins. Co. 398 So. 2d 575 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Denham v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 386 So. 2d 687 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
The plaintiffs argue on appeal that the trial judge erred because he, did not consider all reasonable inferences most favorable to the plaintiffs.
Sevin v. Shape Spa for Health & Beauty Inc. 384 So. 2d 1011 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
Perkins v. American MacH. & Foundary Co. 385 So. 2d 492 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Joiner v. Downing 383 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1980
Although Article 1810 A establishes no standard to be used in determining a party’s right to a directed verdict, (La.App.
Breithaupt v. Sellers 380 So. 2d 1257 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
This Court of Appeal recently had occasion to consider this statutory provision and adopted a (La.App.
Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Ins. Co. 379 So. 2d 822 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980