Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Union Tank Car Co., 439 So. 2d 377.

54 citing documents.

Roy Anderson Corp. v. 225 Baronne Complex, L.L.C. 251 So. 3d 493 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Union Tank Car Company , , 382 (La.
Krielow v. Louisiana Department of Agriculture & Forestry 125 So. 3d 384 La. 2013
City of New Orleans v. ASSESSORS'RETIREMENT AND RELIEF FUND 986 So. 2d 1 La. 2008
State v. Cunningham, 04-2200, pp. 8-9 (La.6/13/05)
State v. All Prop. and Cas. Ins. Carriers 937 So. 2d 313 La. 2006
State v. Cunningham, 2004-2200 p. 8-9 (La.6/13/05), ; (La.
State v. Cunningham 903 So. 2d 1110 La. 2005
State v. Interiano 868 So. 2d 9 La. 2004
State v. Miller 857 So. 2d 423 La. 2003
All Pro Paint, 639 So.2d at 712 ; Adams v. State, Dept. of Health and Human Res.
State v. Campbell 859 So. 2d 223 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
State in Interest of J.A.V., State v. Blackwell, 32,477 (La.App.2d Cir.10/27/99), .
State v. Lee 844 So. 2d 970 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
State v. Palermo 818 So. 2d 745 La. 2002
State v. Norwood 789 So. 2d 614 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
14:3, 7; State in Interest of J.A.V., (on original hearing).
State v. Taylor 769 So. 2d 535 La. 2000
State v. Palermo 765 So. 2d 1155 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
-385 (La.1983), the Louisiana Supreme Court explained just what these two requirements entail: In connection with the requirement of adequate notice, this court has held that a penal statute must describe unlawful conduct with sufficient particularity and clarity that ordinary men of reasonable intelligence are ca
State v. Palermo 765 So. 2d 1139 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
-385 (La.1983), the Louisiana Supreme Court explained just what these two requirements entail: In connection with the requirement of adequate notice, this court has held that a penal statute must describe unlawful conduct with sufficient particularity and clarity that ordinary men of reasonable intelligence are ca
State v. Smith 729 So. 2d 648 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
Fields v. State 714 So. 2d 1244 La. 1998
State v. Byrd 708 So. 2d 401 La. 1998
The trial court based its ruling upon two cases dealing with constitutional vagueness
Palmer v. LOUISIANA FORESTRY COM'N 701 So. 2d 1300 La. 1997
State v. McInnis Bros. Const. 701 So. 2d 937 La. 1997
State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc.
State v. Bentley 692 So. 2d 1207 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
See State v. Broom, supra; "
Livingston Downs Racing Ass'n v. State ex rel. Edwards 653 So. 2d 1311 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
State v. Union Tank Car Company, Inc.
State v. Brown 648 So. 2d 872 La. 1995
See State v. Broom, supra ; [;] -533 (La.1989).
Dupin v. Chambley 649 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
In construing the meaning of statutes, “courts must endeavor to give an interpretation that will give them effectiveness and purpose, rather than one which makes them meaningless.” Smith v. Cajun Insulation, Inc.
In Matter of American Waste and Pollution Control Co. 642 So. 2d 1258 La. 1994
Smith, 392 So.2d at 400 .
State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc. 639 So. 2d 707 La. 1994
Taylor, 479 So.2d at 341 ; Adams v. State, Dept. of Health and Human Res., Rodriguez, 379 So.2d at 1086 ; Alexandria Fire Fighters, 220 La.
State v. Thomas 639 So. 2d 408 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
State v. Davis, supra at 649 .
State v. Young 623 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop 618 So. 2d 962 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
We are aware, however, handed down on March 25, 1983, within days of the decision in State v. Broom, on original hearing, March 18, 1983.
State v. Brown 606 So. 2d 586 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
See State v. Broom, supra ; "
State v. Hookfin 602 So. 2d 757 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Ritchie 590 So. 2d 1139 La. 1991
State v. Union Tank Car, Inc.
State v. Greco 583 So. 2d 825 La. 1991
See State v. Broom, supra ; "
Moolekamp v. Rubin 562 So. 2d 1134 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
State in Interest of JAV 558 So. 2d 214 La. 1990
State v. Barthelemy, supra ; State v. Union Tank Car Co., *216 -86 (La.1983)
State v. Conway 556 So. 2d 1323 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
the Louisiana Supreme Court explained these requirements: "In connection with the requirement of adequate notice, this court has held that a penal statute must describe unlawful conduct with sufficient particularity and clarity that ordinary men of reasonable intelligence are capable of discerning its meani
State v. Barthelemy 545 So. 2d 531 La. 1989
Matter of McGowan 533 So. 2d 999 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Azar 535 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
State v. Lambert, supra, at 552
Gibbs Construction Co. v. State, Department of Labor 530 So. 2d 68 La. 1988
Smith v. Town of Vinton, 209 La.
State v. Coleman 528 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
1998 , 90 L.Ed.2d 678 (1986); (La.
Kaiser Aluminum Exploration Co. v. Thompson 523 So. 2d 240 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Powell 515 So. 2d 1085 La. 1987
State v. Lambert 514 So. 2d 550 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
the Louisiana Supreme Court explained just what these two requirements entail: “In connection with the requirement of adequate notice, this court has held that a penal statute must describe unlawful conduct with sufficient particularity and clarity that ordinary men of reasonable intelligence are capable of
Bruneau v. Edwards 517 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Parker v. Cappel 500 So. 2d 771 La. 1987
Johnson v. Sewerage District No. 2 of Parish of Caddo, 239 La.
State v. Pierre 500 So. 2d 382 La. 1987
LeBlanc v. Altobello 497 So. 2d 1373 La. 1986
State v. Griffin 495 So. 2d 1306 La. 1986
1998 , 90 L.Ed.2d 678 (1986); (La.
State v. Green 493 So. 2d 588 La. 1986
1985); Sutherland Stat Const § 44.17 (4th Ed).
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality v. Pete Caldwell Drilling Co. 484 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
30:1084 that no person shall discharge “air contaminants.” the court pronounced: “While it is true that La.R.S.