DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Application of Respondek, 442 So. 2d 435.

17 citing documents.

  • Green v. Michael Johnson, State Farm Ins. Agency, Allstate Ins. Co. 241 So. 3d 1188 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    Furthermore, the reasoning in Taylor v. Tanner , , 438 (La.
  • In re Bleichner 879 So. 2d 112 La. 2004
    I concur in the majority’s decision to deny the petition, because my contrary opinion expressed in dissent in In re: Bourke, 02-1468 (La.6/14/02), , citing to In re: Appert, and In re: Application of Respondek, has not borne fruit, and today’s decision follows the recently decided cases on this issue.
  • In Re Appeal of Schnyder 824 So. 2d 1135 La. 2002
    Although I agree with this Court's determination that our prior decisions on this issue, including In re: Application or Appert, and In re: Application of Respondek, are incorrect, because of the length of time that contrary jurisprudence existed and the reliance individuals placed on the existence of the former rule, I would revisit the issue of retroactivity and apply In re: Bourke prospectively only.
  • Overruled In Re Bourke 819 So. 2d 1020 La. 2002
    To the extent that our prior decisions, including In re: Application of Appert, and In re: Application of Respondek, (La.
  • Sheppard v. State Farm Ins. Co. 614 So. 2d 208 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    (La.1983), the deceased was the occupant of a non-owned vehicle which was struck by an underinsured motorist.
  • Hull v. Louisiana Indem. 606 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
    which was a case where the plaintiff had accepted a compromise with one excess insurer.
  • Fay v. Willis 577 So. 2d 1147 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
  • Bonstill v. Avant 576 So. 2d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    Rejecting the argument that Wyatt made his selection by accepting the $5,000 UM coverage under his policy, : ‘...
  • Lee v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co. 540 So. 2d 1083 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • Vincent v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. 526 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    Rejecting the argument that Wyatt made his selection by accepting the $5,000 UM coverage under his policy, : "...
  • Wyatt v. Robin 518 So. 2d 494 La. 1988
  • Pardue v. Dean 515 So. 2d 543 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Wyatt v. Robin 509 So. 2d 746 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    in which the court held that “plaintiffs’ acceptance of the policy limits from one uninsured motorist carrier should not be deemed to constitute an implied choice or election to reject the limits from other policies that may be available to them.” This case is clearly distinguishable.
  • Dobson v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. 484 So. 2d 976 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
  • Szwedt v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 479 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • Capone v. King 467 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
  • Rogers v. Ambassador Ins. Co. 452 So. 2d 261 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984