Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Felder v. Georgia Pac. Corp., 405 So. 2d 521.

85 citing documents.

Orgeron v. SEC. INDUS. FUNERAL HOMES 690 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Lavan v. Nowell 676 So. 2d 1192 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Sullivan v. Sullivan 671 So. 2d 315 La. 1996
this court addressed the writing requirement of Article 3071.
Shell Oil Co. v. Jackson 655 So. 2d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
LeBlanc v. Fidelity Fire & Cas.
Braun Welding Supply, Inc. v. Praxair, Inc. 654 So. 2d 388 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Finally, we turn to a discussion by our supreme court in Felder v. Georgia Pacific Corp. 1 , where at 523 and 524 the court explained as follows: Civil Code article 3071, [ ...
Grace v. Zapata Off-Shore Co. 653 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Faulk v. Morvant 649 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
art. 3071, each of the parties to the agreement must expressly indicate its intentions, personally or through an agent, whether at the same time and in the same instrument or not.
Michot v. Mose 649 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Anderson-Dunham, (La.App.
Townsend v. Square 643 So. 2d 787 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Coleman v. Academy of Sacred Heart 650 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Corp., (citations omitted).
LeBlanc v. Fidelity Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. 633 So. 2d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
McRae v. Ellis 632 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
MOREHOUSE PARISH HOSP. v. Pettit 630 So. 2d 1338 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
5th Cir. 1991), writ denied, see also
Scott v. Green 621 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
Jerome v. Duggan 609 So. 2d 1119 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
the plaintiff, who had been injured in an accident, signed a release form provided by the defendant's insurance adjuster.
Pitard v. Davis 599 So. 2d 398 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
Lima v. Schmidt 595 So. 2d 624 La. 1992
Indeed, while a stream of correspondence may constitute a compromise or settlement agreement, an essential element such an agreement must contain is reciprocal concessions of the parties in adjustment of their differences.
First National Bank of Jefferson Parish v. Manor Heights Co. 576 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
American Bank & Trust Co. v. Hannie 568 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
Anderson-Dunham, Inc. v. Hamilton 564 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Hendrix v. City of New Orleans 562 So. 2d 1164 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
rehearing denied, for its interpretation of article 3071.
Rhodes v. Nalencz 545 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
Adams v. Adams 529 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Willett v. Price 515 So. 2d 477 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Mathews v. Fisk 512 So. 2d 1228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Jacobson v. Harris 503 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Veal v. Dwyer 504 So. 2d 884 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Verbois v. Howard, supra.
Vest v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. 493 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
Corp., that: “the requirement that the agreement be in writing and signed by both parties does not necessarily mean that the agreement must be contained in one document.
Shavers v. Olano 487 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
F&S EQUIP. CO. v. Intern. Matex Tank Terminals 469 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
The agreement receited in open court confers upon each of them the right of judicially enforcing its performance, although its substance may hereafter be written in a more convenient form, (emphasis added) the Supreme Court explained the reasons for the requirement that the contract be in writing as follows: While the statute itself does not provide for the consequences of failure to reduce a compromise agreement to writing, this Court has previously held that a compromise which is not reduced t
Audubon Ins. Co. v. Farr 453 So. 2d 232 La. 1984
See Felder v. Georgia Pacific Corp., et al
Allan E. Amundson, Inc. v. Hoppmeyer 442 So. 2d 1254 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
This requirement has further been interpreted to mean that the agreement must be signed by both parties
Wells v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. 437 So. 2d 295 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
App. 1st Cir.1981), affirmed
Landry v. Faulkner 417 So. 2d 1376 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
Tucker v. Atterburg 409 So. 2d 320 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
3071, although the writing may be composed of two documents such as a release signed by a claimant and a check signed by the defendant for the amount specified in the release, (La.