Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of La., Inc., 456 So. 2d 612.

142 citing documents.

Paulette Stoke, Ricquel Hale, Rodney Thomas, Joinell Stokes, Angellica Bozant, Alvin Jones and Carol Jones v. the City … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Troy Parria v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
See McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., La.
Troy Parria v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
See McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., La.
Michael Miazza, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Joseph Robert, Gloria Decuir-Robert, Albert Bierria, Gwendolyn Bierria v. State of Louisiana, Through the Governor, the Division of … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Michael Brantley, Jr. Versus City of Gretna & Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2022
Such an analysis requires the trial court to “evaluate, quantify, and weigh the relevant factors to determine to what extent the class action would in each instance promote or detract from the goals of effectuating substantive law, judicial efficiency, and individual fairness.” Southern Gyms, LLC, 112 So.3d at 829 (quoting McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Joy Maturin and Norris Maturin Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated v. Bayou Teche Water Works, … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
We further noted in Cajuns for Clean Water “[t]he supreme court has made clear ‘any errors to be made in deciding class action issues should be in favor of and not against the maintenance of the class action.’ McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Roger Reeves, Susan Fullerton, Henry Gregory, Rodney Broadway, Anita Darbonne and Ray Powell v. Explo Systems, Inc. and … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2020
See also Doe v. Southern Gyms, LLC, supra; McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of La., Inc., (La.
Opelousas General Hospital Authority, a Public Trust, D/B/A Opelousas General Health System v. Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
osed by law involves a rigorous analysis in which the trial court “must evaluate, quantify, and weigh [the relevant factors] to determine to what extent the class action would in each instance promote or detract from the goals of effectuating substantive law, judicial efficiency, and individual fairness.” McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Joseph Harvey Gautreaux v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
Cajuns for Clean Water, LLC v. Cecelia Water Corp. 257 So. 3d 706 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc. , , 618 (La.
Cajuns for Clean Water, LLC v. Cecelia Water Corporation D/B/A Cecilia Water Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
the “number of potentially aggrieved parties” rather than on the “number of individuals actually aggrieved.” LAW AND ANALYSIS The supreme court has made clear “any errors to be made in deciding class action issues should be in favor of and not against the maintenance of the class action.” McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Harvey v. Bd. of Comm'rs for the Orleans Levee Dist. 236 So. 3d 763 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2017
12/6/11), , 966-67, citing McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc. , , 618 (La.
Aaron Emigh v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hospital La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
However, it is not necessary that all plaintiffs suffer identical damage and “individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominate liability issues are common to the class.” McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Yokum v. 544 Funky, LLC 202 So. 3d 1065 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
of Louisiana, Inc., (La.App.
Albe v. City of New Orleans 174 So. 3d 212 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2015
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Claborne v. Housing Authority of New Orleans 165 So. 3d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Estopinal v. Parish of St. Bernard 154 So. 3d 591 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2014
Baker v. PHC-MINDEN, L.P. 146 So. 3d 921 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
Doe v. University Healthcare Systems, L.L.C. 145 So. 3d 557 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
valuating, quantifying, and weighing “the relevant factors, to determine to what extent the class action would, in each instance, promote or detract from the goals of effectuating substantive law, judicial efficiency, and individual fairness.” Brooks v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 08-2035, p. 10 (La.5/22/09), (citing McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., 12 ).
Doe v. Southern Gyms, LLC 112 So. 3d 822 La. 2013
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Walker v. AMID/Metro Partnership, LLC 109 So. 3d 35 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Guidry v. Dow Chemical Co. 105 So. 3d 900 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 6/11/08) , (citing McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., ).
Jane Doe v. Southern Gyms, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Doe v. Southern Gyms, LLC 92 So. 3d 654 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Watters v. Department of Social Services 102 So. 3d 118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Services of Louisiana, Inc., see also Advisory Committee Notes, supra, 39 F.R.D.
Price v. Martin 79 So. 3d 960 La. 2011
See Brooks v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 08-2035 (La.5/22/09), ; Ford v. Murphy Oil U.S.A., Inc., 96-2913, 96-2917, 96-2929 (La.9/9/97), ; McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Smith Ex Rel. Upchurch v. McGuire Funeral Home, Inc. 70 So. 3d 873 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., Edmonds, supra.
Price v. Martin 56 So. 3d 1109 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
The trial court “must evaluate, quantify and weigh [the relevant factors] to determine to what extent the class action would in each instance promote or detract from the goals of effectuating substantive law, judicial efficiency, and individual fairness.” McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Dupree v. Lafayette Insurance Co. 41 So. 3d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Scott v. American Tobacco Co., Inc. 36 So. 3d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
See, e.g., Ford v. Murphy Oil, U.S.A., Inc., 96-2913 (La.9/9/97), ; Doerr v. Mobil Oil Corp., 04-1789, p. 4 (La.App.
Pollard v. Alpha Technical 31 So. 3d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
In so doing, “the trial court must actively inquire into every aspect of the case and should not hesitate to require showings beyond the pleadings.” [citations omitted] While any error to be made in deciding class action issues should be in favor of, not against, maintenance of the class action, McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., nevertheless, Louisiana trial courts are afforded broad discretion in determining the class certification issues, and have wide latitude in
Oliver v. Orleans Parish School Board 25 So. 3d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Brooks v. Union Pacific Railroad 13 So. 3d 546 La. 2009
The trial court “must evaluate, quantify and weigh [the relevant factors] to determine to what extent the class action would in each instance promote or detract from the goals of effectuating substantive law, judicial efficiency, and individual fairness.” McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Thomas v. WILBERT & SONS, LLC 9 So. 3d 355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Thomas v. Mobil Oil Corp. 14 So. 3d 7 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Marshall Ex Rel. Minor Chil. v. Air Liquide-Big Three, Inc. 2 So. 3d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Class actions are restricted to cases “in which it would achieve economies of time, effort and expense, and promote uniformity of decision as to persons similarly situated, without sacrificing procedural fairness or bringing about other undesirable results.” McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of La., Inc., Gaylord, supra at p. 19 , 691 So.2d at 771 .
John M. Duhe, Jr. v. Texaco, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
In McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., the supreme court pointed out that “individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominant liability issues are common to the class.” The court further concluded that “a pragmatic rather than formalistic review of the pleadings and the showing made herein clearly indicates th
Duhe v. Texaco, Inc. 998 So. 2d 1220 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
In McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., the supreme court pointed out that "individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominant liability issues are common to the class."
Chalona v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp. 3 So. 3d 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Chalona v. LOUISIANA CIT. PROP. INS. CORP. 3 So. 3d 494 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Faith Brooks v. Union Pacific Railroad Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
5 Cir. 10/14/98), McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Brooks v. UNION PACIFIC RR CO. 985 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
5 Cir. 10/14/98) , ; McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Dr. Clark Gunderson v. F. A. Richard & Associates, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
of La., (“With respect to the question of damages, individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominant liability issues are common to the class.”).
Clark A. Gunderson, M.D. v. F. A. Richard & Associates, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
of La., (“With respect to the question of damages, individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominant liability issues are common to the class.”).
Clark A. Gunderson, M.D. v. F. A. Richard & Associates, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
of La., (“With respect to the question of damages, individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominant liability issues are common to the class.”).
Gunderson v. FA RICHARD & ASSOCIATES 977 So. 2d 1128 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
of La., ("With respect to the question of damages, individual questions of quantum do not preclude a class action when predominant liability issues are common to the class.").
Baumann v. D&J FILL, INC. 977 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
This case is analogous to McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., (La.
Sutton Steel & Supply v. Bellsouth Mobility 971 So. 2d 1257 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
5 Cir. 10/14/98) , ; McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.
Sutton Steel & Supply, Inc. v. Bellsouth Mobility, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
5 Cir. 10/14/98), McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services of Louisiana, Inc.