Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Giroir v. SOUTH LA. MEDICAL CTR., ETC., 475 So. 2d 1040.

184 citing documents.

Montiville v. City of Westwego 592 So. 2d 390 La. 1992
Medical Ctr., Etc., (La.
Masson v. Champion Ins. Co. 591 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
for the criterion to add or substitute a plaintiff.
Parker v. Southern American Ins. Co. 590 So. 2d 55 La. 1991
Bunch v. Schilling Distributing Inc. 589 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
1st Cir. 1984), affirmed and amended in part, reversed in part on other grounds, this court stated: `(W)e know of no authority which states that when only one of the potential claimants is before the court (on a survival action) that his award must be reduced proportionately by the amount that could have been claimed by other parties.'" Accordingly, we find that Mrs. Bunch is entitled t
Brown v. City of New Orleans 580 So. 2d 1093 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
Medical Center Division of Hospitals
Findley v. City of Baton Rouge 570 So. 2d 1168 La. 1990
McDonald v. New Orleans Private Patrol 569 So. 2d 106 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
1st Cir.1984), affirmed in part; reversed in part on other grounds
Diesel Driving Academy, Inc. v. Ferrier 563 So. 2d 898 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
Duffie v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co. 563 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Medical Ctr., et al., that Mr. Lockridge relies on does not apply in the case before us. In Giroir, the Supreme Court allowed an amended petition adding children as new plaintiffs in a wrongful death and survival action, based on the death of their mother, after prescription had run, by relating the amended petition back to the t
Spencer-Wallington, Inc. v. Service Merchandise 562 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Farber v. US Fidelity & Guar. Ins. Co. 561 So. 2d 951 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
Medical Ctr., etc., the court considered the same issue with respect to a timely petition by a father, amended after the prescription date to add his children, in a wrongful death and survival action.
Collins v. Crosby Group, Inc. 551 So. 2d 42 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Gilboy v. American Tobacco Co. 540 So. 2d 391 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Giroir v. South Louisiana Medical Center, Division of Hospitals
Paddock v. Dennies 532 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Medical Ctr., the Louisiana Supreme Court established the following four-part test to determine whether a post-prescription amended petition adding *856 or substituting a party will relate back to the timely-filed original petition: (1) The amended claim arises out of the same conduct, transaction or occurrence set forth
Smith v. Williams 535 So. 2d 959 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Louviere v. Hartford Ins. Co. 531 So. 2d 299 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Medical Ctr., Etc., (La.
Sam v. Sorrel Electrical Contractors, Inc. 525 So. 2d 244 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Medical Center, , 1045 (La.1985).
WOOD ON BEHALF HAYES v. Hayes 524 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
where the amended petition, filed after prescription had run, added major children as plaintiffs and changed the husband's capacity in a survival action from the administrator of the children's estate to his individual capacity, the supreme court set forth the following four-part test to determine whether t
Calloway v. City of New Orleans 524 So. 2d 182 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Minor v. Casten 521 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
1st Cir.1984), reversed in part on other grounds, (involving both actions); (La.App.
Raziano v. Lincoln Property Co. 520 So. 2d 1213 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Medical Ctr., Etc., the Supreme Court permitted the addition of decedent's children as parties-plaintiff by supplemental and amending petition.
Butler v. Baber 512 So. 2d 653 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
Esteve v. Iberia Parish Hosp. 520 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Medical Center, Etc., (La.
Poirier v. Browning Ferris Industries 517 So. 2d 998 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Eiskina v. Keasler 511 So. 2d 1289 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
1st Cir.1984), reversed on other grounds
Randall v. Feducia 507 So. 2d 1237 La. 1987
and Giroir v. South Louisiana Medical Center, Division of Hospitals, we established the guidelines for determining whether an amended petition adding a new party relates back to the date of filing of the original petition.
Pontiff v. Bailey 509 So. 2d 451 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
Medical Center, , 1043 (La.1985), the court reviewed whether plaintiff's amended petition adding a defendant related back so as to overcome prescription.
Brown v. Department of Health & Human Resources 498 So. 2d 785 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
1st Cir.1984), reversed *787 in part on other grounds, (La.App.
Bertrand v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 491 So. 2d 474 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
because our Article 1153 is based on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c), its doctrinal commentaries and judicial interpretation are strongly persuasive as to the meaning and application of the Louisiana article, citing Tate, Amendment of Pleadings in Louisiana, 43 Tul L.Rev.
Illidge v. Southern American Insurance Co. 484 So. 2d 131 La. 1986
LA Medical Center, La., .
Booty v. Kentwood Manor Nursing Home, Inc. 483 So. 2d 634 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
1st Cir. 1984), affirmed and amended in part, reversed in part on other grounds, this court stated: "(W)e know of no authority which states that when only one of the potential claimants is before the court (on a survival action) that his award must be reduced proportionately by the amount that could have been claimed by other parties."
Taylor v. Charity Hospital of Louisiana in New Orleans 481 So. 2d 1043 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Dykes v. Peabody Shoreline Geophysical 482 So. 2d 662 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Taylor v. Charity Hospital of Louisiana in New Orleans 476 So. 2d 338 La. 1985
The judgment of the Court of Appeal is vacated and the case is remanded to consider whether the pleading relates back in light of Giroir