Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Lamb v. Lamb, 430 So. 2d 51.

101 citing documents.

Nolaluna, LLC v. E. Howell Crosby, Chaffe McCall, LLP, and Abc Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
Under the procedural circumstances facing this Court, we are disinclined to “permit technical pleading rules to triumph over actual justice[.]” Patrick, 22-0766, p. 9, 357 So.3d at 877 ( (La.
Walid Attamari v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
Tammy Martinez v. Lg Electronics U.S.A., Inc., Lg Electronics Alabama, Inc., and Home Depot U.S.A. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
Sherry Patrick v. Center for Restorative Breast Surgery LLC, St. Charles Surgical Hospital LLC, Christopher Trahan, M.D., William … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
Chiel Kimble v. Curahealth New Orleans, LLC La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
Certainly, the mere failure to file an answer, without more, is not sufficient grounds to grant a new trial.” (La.
Edgefield v. Audubon Nature Inst., Inc. 267 So. 3d 738 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
See Lamb v. Lamb , , 54 (La.
Explained Ron Warren, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Derek Hebert v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company La. 2017
David Pitts Jr. and Kenyetta Gurley v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company and Rhoda Renee Jones, M.D. 218 So. 3d 58 La. 2017
Ryan v. Case New Holland, Inc. 211 So. 3d 611 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
Ron Warren, Ind. & O/B/O Estate of Derek Hebert v. Shelter Mutual Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
Ron Warren, Ind & Obo Est. of D. Hebert v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
art. 1973 in order to prevent a “miscarriage of justice.” as to the law generally applicable to the issue of the grant of a new trial.
Ron Warren, Ind & Obo Est. of D. Hebert v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
art. 1973 in order to prevent a “miscarriage of justice.” as to the law generally applicable to the issue of the grant of a new trial.
Warren v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. 196 So. 3d 776 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Warren v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. 196 So. 3d 835 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
art. 1973 in order to prevent a “miscarriage of justice.” \ - • 1 as to the law generally applicable to the issue of the grant of a new trial.
Warren v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. 196 So. 3d 850 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
art. 1973 in order to prevent a “miscarriage of justice.” as to the law generally applicable to the issue of the grant of a new trial.
Richard Bryant Logan and Carrie Logan v. Dr. Donald Paul Schwab, Jr. 193 So. 3d 118 La. 2016
Jude Broussard, Et Ux. v. Lafayette Physical Rehabilitation Hospital La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
Broussard v. Lafayette Physical Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC 191 So. 3d 1202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Charles Henry Davis, Et Ux. v. Sabine Parish Police Jury La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
in any case if there is good ground therefor, except as otherwise provided by law.” This has been interpreted to mean that “[w]hen the trial judge is convinced by his examination of the facts that the judgment would result in a miscarriage of justice, a new trial should be ordered.” (citations omitted).
Michael Burley v. New York Life Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
in any case if there is good ground therefor, except as otherwise provided by law.” This has been interpreted to mean that “[w]hen the trial judge is convinced by his examination of the facts that the judgment would result in a miscarriage of justice, a new trial should be ordered.” (citations omitted).
Burley v. New York Life Insurance Co. 179 So. 3d 922 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
in any case if there is good ground therefor, .except as otherwise provided ,by law.” This has been interpreted to mean that “[w]hen the trial judge is convinced by his examination of the facts that the judgment would result in a miscarriage of justice, a new trial should be ordered.” (citations omitted).
Bernard M. Boudreaux, Jr. v. Paul Christopher Cummings La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Boudreaux v. Cummings 170 So. 3d 1002 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Caceres v. United Automobile Insurance Co. 154 So. 3d 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Hardy, 292 So.2d at 575 ; -54 (La.1983).
Johnson v. European Motors-Ali 129 So. 3d 697 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
Pollock v. Talco Midstream Assets, Ltd., 46,302 (La.App.2d Cir.5/18/11), , writ denied, 11-1295 (La.9/23/11), , Hickman v. Wm.
LCR-M Ltd. Partnership v. Jim Hotard Properties, L.L.C. 126 So. 3d 668 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
A new trial should be ordered when “the judgment would result in a miscarriage of justice.”
Marcus Broussard, Jr. v. Martin Operating Partnership La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
we set forth the standard for granting a new trial pursuant to LA.CODE CIV.
Broussard v. Martin Operating Partnership 103 So. 3d 713 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
we set forth the standard for granting a new trial pursuant to La.
Atkins v. Louisiana Mutual Medical Insurance Co. 105 So. 3d 781 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
Horton v. Ma yeaux, 05-1704 (La.5/30/06)
Pollock v. TALCO MIDSTREAM ASSETS, LTD. 70 So. 3d 835 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Sims v. Hawkins-Sheppard 58 So. 3d 598 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
Although a new trial motion was at the center of the supreme court’s the principle laid down is applicable to the present situation.
Richard J. Guillory, Sr. v. Dr. Michael Chapman La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
2/4/05), () that “[t]o allow the judgment below to stand would be to permit technical pleading rules to triumph over actual justice.” In Peters, also a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff identified an expert witness in opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and submitted 1
Guillory v. Chapman 38 So. 3d 573 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
1 Cir. 10/29/04), , writ denied, 04-2923 (La.2/4/05), () that “[t]o allow the judgment below to stand would be to permit technical pleading rules to triumph over actual justice.” In Peters , also a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff identified an expert witness in opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and submitted |sthe expert’s repo
Silva v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 38 So. 3d 934 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Johnson v. Morehouse General Hospital 27 So. 3d 1085 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Furthermore, |22“when the trial judge is convinced by his examination of the facts that the judgment would result in a miscarriage of justice, a new trial should be ordered.” Dowles, supra.
Charlotte Alfred v. Larry Butler La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
., this court will not hesitate to set aside the ruling of the trial judge in a case of manifest abuse.”
Alfred v. Butler 28 So. 3d 1089 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Though the “[trial] court has much discretion [in determining whether to grant a new trial] ...., this court will not hesitate to set aside the ruling of the trial judge in a case of manifest abuse.” (La.
Ziifle v. Brae Asset Fund, L.P. 8 So. 3d 15 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Shyne v. Red River Marine Institute, Inc. 981 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Campbell v. Select Car Co., Inc., 38,443 (La.App.2d Cir.5/12/04), , writ denied, 04-1747 (La.10/15/04), .
Derrick Shawn James v. Lynden Burton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
art. 1973 allows a district court to use its discretion to order a new trial whenever it is “convinced by [its] examination of the facts that the judgment would result in a miscarriage of justice.” [.]
James v. Burton 983 So. 2d 999 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Dowles v. Conagra, Inc. 980 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Carey Davis v. Harrah's Lake Charles La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
., this court will not hesitate to set aside the ruling of the trial judge in a case of manifest abuse.”
Davis v. HARRAH'S LAKE CHARLES, LLC 945 So. 2d 878 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Lawson v. Mitsubishi Motor Sales of America 938 So. 2d 35 La. 2006
Horton v. Mayeaux 931 So. 2d 338 La. 2006
In fact, Louisiana courts have traditionally held that, when a district court is convinced that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, it has "virtually unlimited discretion to grant a new trial," and, "unless an abuse of discretion can be demonstrated, a trial court's action in granting or denying a new
McNab v. Blanton 927 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
(La.1989); Hickman v. Wm.
Smith v. Alliance Compressors 922 So. 2d 674 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Adrinner Smith v. Alliance Compressors La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
in any case if there is good ground therefor, except as otherwise provided by law.” This has been interpreted to mean that “[w]hen the trial judge is convinced by his examination of the facts that the judgment would result in 6 a miscarriage of justice, a new trial should be ordered.” (citations omitted).
Mary Williams and Melvin George Williams v. W.O. Moss Regional Medical Center La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
this court will not hesitate to set aside the ruling of the trial judge in a case of manifest abuse.”