Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Watson v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Ins. Co., 469 So. 2d 967.

999 citing documents.

Brown v. Louisiana Indem. Co. 707 So. 2d 1240 La. 1998
Varnell v. Louisiana Tech University 709 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Bell v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co. 707 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Vigh v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. 706 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
Co., the Supreme Court set forth five factors which may influence the degree of fault assigned: (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger; (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct; (3) the significance of what was sought by the conduct; (4) the capaciti
Norton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 707 So. 2d 489 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Creel v. St. Charles Gaming Co., Inc. 707 So. 2d 475 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Dekeyser v. Automotive Cas. Ins. Co. 706 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
O'RILEY v. City of Shreveport 706 So. 2d 213 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Bostwick v. MAPP Industries, Inc. 707 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Co., quoting from Section 2(b) of the Uniform Comparative Fault Act and the Comments thereto, as follows: In determining the percentages of fault, the trier of fact shall consider both the nature of the conduct of each party at fault and the extent of the causal relation between the conduct and the damages claim
Hammons v. City of Tallulah 705 So. 2d 276 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Odom v. Johnson 704 So. 2d 1254 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Riley v. Reliance Ins. Co. 703 So. 2d 158 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Richard v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 702 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Daye v. General Motors Corp. 712 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
The trial court granted the motion and rendered judgment re-allocating General Motors with 75% fault and the plaintiff with 25% fault, citing the jury's misapplication of the factors for the assessment of comparative fault set out in Watson v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, et al
Nalle v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. 702 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Miller v. Dupont 702 So. 2d 902 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Co., as follows: In assessing the nature of the conduct of the parties, various factors may influence the degree of fault assigned, including: (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger, (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct, (3) the significance of w
Duryea v. Handy 700 So. 2d 1123 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
In allocating fault, Louisiana courts look to several factors
Carbon v. Allstate Ins. Co. 701 So. 2d 462 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Co., we cannot say that the jury was clearly wrong in its assessment of 20% fault to Jennifer.
Boteler v. Rivera 700 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Bellard v. South Cent. Bell Telephone Co. 702 So. 2d 695 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Co., the supreme court stated: In assessing the nature of the conduct of the parties, various factors may influence the degree of fault assigned, including: (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger, (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct, (3) the sig
Eppinette v. City of Monroe 698 So. 2d 658 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Nichols v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 698 So. 2d 53 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Owens v. Concordia Elec. Co-Op., Inc. 699 So. 2d 434 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Grant v. Allstate Ins. Co. 696 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Ramos v. Ramos 697 So. 2d 280 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
Southern v. Lyons 696 So. 2d 128 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Miller v. Keal 694 So. 2d 569 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Medice v. Delchamps, Inc. 694 So. 2d 528 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Goodwyne v. People's Moss Gin, Inc. 694 So. 2d 1101 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Kelly v. Boh Bros. Const. Co., Inc. 694 So. 2d 463 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Guillory v. Ins. Co. of North America 692 So. 2d 1029 La. 1997
Tubre v. STATE, DOTD 693 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Lejeune v. Union Pacific Railroad 693 So. 2d 804 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Carter v. Brookshire Grocery Co. 690 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
the Louisiana Supreme Court has set forth the following factors for comparing the parties' fault: (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger, (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct, (3) the significance of what was sought by the conduct, (4) the c
Picou v. Equifax Services, Inc. 690 So. 2d 219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
Todd v. State 685 So. 2d 313 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Co., the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth factors to be used in determining the degree of fault assigned: In assigning percentages of fault attributable to each tort-feasor, a court should consider both the nature of each party's conduct and the extent of the relation between that conduct and the damages suffer
Grant v. Allstate Insurance Co. 688 So. 2d 703 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Demery v. Housing Auth. of New Orleans 689 So. 2d 659 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Maldonado v. Louisiana Superdome Com'n 687 So. 2d 1087 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Co., : (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger; (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct; (3) the significance of what was sought by the conduct; (4) whether the capacities of the actors were superior or inferior; (5) whether any extenuating circumstanc
Terrebonne v. Goodman Mfg. Corp. 687 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Warren v. Campagna 686 So. 2d 969 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Co., the Supreme Court set forth five factors which *981 may influence the degree of fault assigned: (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger, (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct, (3) the significance of what was sought by the conduct, (4) the cap
Baudoin v. Opie 685 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Co., : (1) [Wjhether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger[;] (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct[;] (3) the significance of what was sought by the conduct!;] |3(4) the capacities of the actor, whether superior or inferior!;] and (5) any extenuating circumst
Stewart v. Winn Dixie Louisiana, Inc. 686 So. 2d 907 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Sanderford v. Lombard 685 So. 2d 1162 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Todd v. State ex rel. Department of Social Services, Office of Community Services 685 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Co., the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth factors to be used in determining the degree of fault assigned: In assigning percentages of fault attributable to each tort-feasor, a court should consider both the nature of each party’s conduct and the extent of the relation between that conduct and the damages suffer
Moore v. Safeway, Inc. 700 So. 2d 831 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Winn v. City of Alexandria 685 So. 2d 281 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Martin v. Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development 683 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Peck v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 682 So. 2d 974 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Migues v. City of Lake Charles 682 So. 2d 946 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Co., the court determined the factors that should be considered when ascertaining comparative fault.