DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 396 So. 2d 878.

562 citing documents.

  • Charles Webster, Et Ux. v. Doug Selman Builders, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    See Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Mendoza v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co. 77 So. 3d 18 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Joseph v. Ratcliff 63 So. 3d 220 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    *225 We also decline to exercise our plenary power of supervisory jurisdiction, as the merits of the instant case do not meet the criteria set forth by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., (per curiam).
  • Bolden v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. 60 So. 3d 679 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    “A court of appeal has plenary power to exercise supervisory jurisdiction over district courts and may do so at any time, according to the discretion of the court.” Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Favrot v. Favrot 68 So. 3d 1099 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Farrar v. Certified Coatings of California, Inc. 38 So. 3d 940 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2010
    See, e.g., Herlitz Construction Co. Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., n. 1 (La.1981).
  • A & B Valve and Piping Systems, LLC v. Commercial Metals Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    As stated by the Louisiana Supreme Court, “[a] court of appeal has plenary power to exercise supervisory jurisdiction over district courts and may do so at any time, according to the discretion of the court.” Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • A & B Valve & Piping Systems, L.L.C. v. Commercial Metals Co. 28 So. 3d 1202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    As stated by the Louisiana Supreme Court, “[a] court of appeal has plenary power to exercise supervisory jurisdiction over district courts and may do so at any time, according to the discretion of the court.” Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Peyton Place, Condominium Associates, Inc. v. Guastella 18 So. 3d 132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., (interlocutory judgments are only appealable when they may cause irreparable injury).
  • Triche v. Martin 13 So. 3d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    On November 6, 2007, this Court denied Cherokee’s writ application, declining to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction under the criteria set forth in Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Alexander v. Palazzo 5 So. 3d 950 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., n. 1 (La.1981).
  • Balakrishnan v. Louisiana State University School of Medicine In New Orleans 4 So. 3d 905 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Messinger would apparently include those criteria that the Supreme Court noted in Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. *908 Hotel Inventors of New Iberia, Inc., to-wit: (1) whether the decision will terminate the litigation between the parties; (2) whether no dispute of fact needs to be resolved; (3) judicial efficiency; (4) fundamental fairness; or (5) whether a future trial on the merits will be useless.
  • Hall v. James 986 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    This court may exercise its supervisory jurisdiction if there is a showing of irreparable harm pursuant to the guidelines in Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., : When the overruling of the exception is arguably incorrect, when a reversal will terminate the litigation, and when there is no dispute of fact to be resolved, judicial efficiency and fundamental fairness to the litigants dictates that the merits of the application for supervisory writs should be deci
  • Pendarvis v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. 991 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    A panel of this court declined to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction, finding that under Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., Liberty Mutual would have an adequate remedy by review on appeal.
  • French Jordan, Inc. v. Travelers Ins. Co. 958 So. 2d 699 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    art.2083; Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Alex v. Rayne Concrete Service 951 So. 2d 138 La. 2007
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Gerrets v. Gerrets 948 So. 2d 343 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    2 Cir.1989), citing, Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., note 1 (La.1981).
  • Moss v. State 925 So. 2d 1185 La. 2006
    *1190 DOTD sought supervisory review of the district court's adverse ruling in the Court of Appeal, First Circuit which initially declined to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction, citing Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Poole v. Poole 926 So. 2d 60 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
  • M & L Industries, LLC v. Derek Hailey La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    and Herlitz Construction Co. Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., note 1 (La.1981).
  • M & L INDUSTRIES, LLC v. Hailey 923 So. 2d 869 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    and Herlitz Construction Co. Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., note 1 (La.1981).
  • Perez v. Finn 899 So. 2d 585 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
    In Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., the Supreme Court stated: LA court of appeal has plenary power to exercise supervisory jurisdiction over district courts and may do so at any time, according to the discretion of the court.
  • Roundtree v. New Orleans Aviation Bd. 896 So. 2d 1078 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc. , discussed infra.
  • COTTONPORT BANK v. DD Group, Inc. 893 So. 2d 171 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    DISCUSSION In Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., the supreme court explained when a court of appeal should exercise its supervisory jurisdiction over a trial court's ruling on an exception: When the overruling of the exception is arguably incorrect, when a reversal will terminate the litigation, and when there is no dispute of fact to be resolved, judicia
  • The Cottonport Bank v. Dd Group, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    1 DISCUSSION In Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., the supreme court explained when a court of appeal should exercise its supervisory jurisdiction over a trial court’s ruling on an exception: When the overruling of the exception is arguably incorrect, when a reversal will terminate the litigation, and when there is no dispute of fact to
  • DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES v. Howard 898 So. 2d 443 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    In Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., the Louisiana Supreme Court held that judicial efficiency and fundamental fairness mandates that an appellate court exercise its supervisory jurisdiction to review a matter when the ruling of the trial court is arguably incorrect, when a reversal will terminate the litigation, and when there is no dispute of
  • Jones v. State 891 So. 2d 698 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Christiana v. Southern Baptist Hospital 867 So. 2d 809 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Miller v. Tassin 849 So. 2d 782 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Patterson v. Alexander & Hamilton, Inc. 844 So. 2d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    In Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., (La.
  • Frederic v. Zodiac Development 839 So. 2d 448 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., (noting irreparable injury occurs if any ruling cannot as a practical matter be corrected on appeal and stating as an example that once the trial court overrules an exception to venue and the case is tried on the merits in the wrong venue, an appellate court has no practical means of correcting the error on a
  • Hampton v. CAPPAERT MANUFACTURED HOUSING 839 So. 2d 363 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., Danny Weaver Logging Inc. v. Norwel Equip.
  • P.S. Chez Sidney, L.L.C. v. Acadiana Fisherman's Co-Op 836 So. 2d 545 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., (La.App.
  • Scarbrough v. J. Ray McDermott 833 So. 2d 436 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., ).
  • Miller v. Superior Shipyard & Fabrication, Inc. 835 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    We further decline to exercise our supervisory jurisdiction to review this partial summary judgment by treating Lexington's appeal as an application for supervisory writs, as the ruling at issue does not meet the criteria of Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • MT. HAWLEY INS. v. ADT SEC. Systems, Inc. 831 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Williams v. City of New Orleans ex rel. Public Belt Railroad Commission 815 So. 2d 311 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., stated “logically extends to interlocutory judgments that do not cause irreparable injury.” n. 1 (La.1981).
  • Bonorden v. Gertrude Gardner Realtors, Inc. 815 So. 2d 300 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    Vernor, supra (Lemmon, J., concurring); see also Herlitz Construction Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Hughes v. Albertson's, Inc. 803 So. 2d 1150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    The criteria of Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., have not been satisfied.
  • Crawford v. BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF LA. 814 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    and Herlitz Construction Co. Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., note 1 (La.1981).
  • McCrary v. New Orleans Health Corp. 798 So. 2d 1085 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    The Dixon court also rejected defendant's request to exercise its supervisory review for non-appealable interlocutory rulings as the ruling failed to meet the criteria of Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Metro Riverboat Associates v. La. Gaming Bd. 774 So. 2d 1193 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    See also Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Hopewell, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Co. 770 So. 2d 874 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    In Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., the supreme court set out guidelines for the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction: When the overruling of the exception is arguably incorrect, when a reversal will terminate the litigation, and when there is no dispute of fact to be resolved, judicial efficiency and fundamental fairness to the litigants dic
  • Danny Weaver Logging Inc. v. Norwel Equip. Co. 766 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    1992) and Herlitz Construction Co. Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., note 1 (La.1981).
  • Fuggins v. Burger King 760 So. 2d 605 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    NOTES [1] We exercise our supervisory jurisdiction under the policy announced in Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Collins v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America 752 So. 2d 825 La. 2000
    Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • State Farm General Insurance Co. v. Fink 751 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    In Herlitz Construction Company, Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., the court granted a writ from a judgment overruling a peremptory exception of no cause of action.
  • Grefer v. Alpha Technical 744 So. 2d 1284 La. 1999
    See Herlitz Construction Co. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc.
  • Richard v. Swiber 760 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    Herlitz Const. Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., (per curiam).
  • Lacroix v. Lacroix 742 So. 2d 1036 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999