DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

999 citing documents.

  • Chatelain v. PROJECT SQUARE 505 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
    the Supreme Court offered guidelines for apportioning fault and noted Section 2(b) of the Uniform Comparative Fault Act which provides that the trier of fact consider both the nature of the conduct of each party at fault and the causal relationship between the conduct and the damages claimed.
  • LeBlanc v. Barras 504 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Prejean v. Commonwealth for Community Change, Inc. 503 So. 2d 661 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
    *665 Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, (La.
  • US Fire Ins. v. W. Monroe Charter Service 504 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • Brownell v. Dietz Motor Lines 503 So. 2d 1069 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • Ledbetter v. State, Dept. of Transp. & Dev. 502 So. 2d 1383 La. 1987
  • Gordon v. Commercial Union Insurance Company 503 So. 2d 190 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
  • Hammer v. Combre 503 So. 2d 624 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
  • Dooley v. Wright 501 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • Snyder v. Bergeron 501 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Pringle v. Gassiott 499 So. 2d 738 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
  • Chaisson v. Daigle 499 So. 2d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Gallagher v. Favrot 499 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
    Co., -74 (La.1985) states: *1209 We recognize that a standard for determining percentages of fault has not been provided by the Legislature, and we are therefore presented with an opportunity to offer guidelines as we apportion fault....
  • Harris v. Pineset 499 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Perret v. Webster 498 So. 2d 283 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
    rehearing denied June 27, 1985.
  • Brown v. DSI Transports, Inc. 496 So. 2d 478 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
  • Gadman v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 493 So. 2d 661 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
    Co., our Supreme Court offered guidance for apportioning fault under a comparative fault system: In determining the percentages of fault, the trier of fact should 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 claimed.
  • Davis v. Winningham Datsun-Volvo, Inc. 493 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Gadman v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. 493 So. 2d 661 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Lee v. Great Southwest Fire Ins. Co. 493 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Taylor v. Dixie Dandy 493 So. 2d 654 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Mercer v. Fruehauf Corp. 492 So. 2d 538 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company
  • Bivalacqua v. Aube 493 So. 2d 209 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company
  • Keith v. Bearden 488 So. 2d 1071 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
    Quoting the Supreme Court's language in Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., we noted that it is proper to 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 claimed."
  • Trosclair v. Terrebonne Parish School Bd. 489 So. 2d 1293 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Collins v. Sonnier 488 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Co., for consideration in the apportionment of fault: “ ‘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 claimed.
  • Attales v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. 488 So. 2d 474 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
  • McCoog v. Roberts 488 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Garrett v. Celino 489 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
  • Riley v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc. 489 So. 2d 931 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
  • Prothro v. Dillahunty 488 So. 2d 1163 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Ledbetter v. STATE, LA. DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. 482 So. 2d 1035 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    Our Supreme Court, at 974 (La.
  • Rowell v. Carter Mobile Homes, Inc. 482 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • Motton v. Travelers Ins. Co. 484 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Co., the Supreme Court offered guidelines for apportioning fault under a system of comparative fault: "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 claimed.
  • Harper v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 484 So. 2d 737 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    See also Watson v. State Farm Fire and Casualty *739 Insurance Co., (La.
  • Markey v. Howard 484 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Co., and found that the testimony and evidence do not substantiate the jury finding (a finding with which the trial judge evidently agreed) of any fault on the part of the plaintiff, Markey.
  • Ledbetter v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development 482 So. 2d 1035 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Our Supreme Court, at 974 (La.
  • Armand v. La. Power & Light Co. 482 So. 2d 802 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
    In assessing the nature of the conduct of the parties and determining the correct percentages of fault, I : (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 capacities of the actor, whether superior or inferior, and (5) any extenuating circumstances which
  • John P. Harris, MD, Inc. v. Parmley 480 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
    Inc. Co., but here we cannot say the trial judge's findings of fact were clearly wrong.
  • Kaplan v. Lloyds Ins. Co. 479 So. 2d 961 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
  • Pringle v. Williamson Chevrolet, Buick & Pontiac, Inc. 480 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • Stablier v. Big T Welding Supply Co. 479 So. 2d 418 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • Aymond v. Smith 476 So. 2d 1081 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
    and Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company
  • Keys v. Box 476 So. 2d 1141 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company
  • Veazey v. Parish of Avoyelles 476 So. 2d 1057 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
    our Supreme Court has set forth a number of guidelines for determining percentage of fault.
  • Finley v. North Assur. Co. of America 476 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • Ebey v. Coggins 474 So. 2d 1352 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    once an appellate court has determined that the trier of fact is clearly wrong, the appellate court is empowered by the provisions of LSA-C.C.P.
  • Aguillard v. Langlois 471 So. 2d 1011 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    In Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, a case involving contributory negligence, the Court took advantage of the opportunity to offer guidelines for apportioning fault under comparative fault: "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 cau
  • Lesniewski v. Fowler Trucking Co. 471 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    Co., the Louisiana Supreme Court enumerated some of the factors to be considered in assessing the nature of the conduct of the parties: “(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 sou