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.

  • Tasker v. City of New Orleans 834 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    Co., 84-2158 (La.1985), , the court set out several factors to consider in allocating fault among the parties involved: (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 a
  • Nelson v. La. Stadium and Exposition Dist. 832 So. 2d 1043 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • Conner v. Stelly 830 So. 2d 1102 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
  • Warren v. Sabine Towing and Transp. Co. 831 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Co., set forth the criteria under which we should apportion fault: 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
  • Edwards v. New Zion Apartments Ltd. Partnership 830 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Co., the trier of fact compares the relative fault of the parties in the assessment of liability.
  • Estevez v. Baron 828 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    Co., (1985), the Louisiana Supreme Court identified the factors to consider in weighing the degree of fault assigned by the jury.
  • Updegraff v. STATE EX REL. DOTD 828 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • Updegraff v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 828 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    Co., : | inIn 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 what was
  • Molina v. City of New Orleans 830 So. 2d 994 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • Riley v. Maison Orleans II, Inc. 829 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Co., wherein the 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 danger, (2) how great a risk was created by the conduct, (3) the signific
  • Kunofsky v. Davie Shoring, Inc. 828 So. 2d 1203 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
  • Street v. Louisiana Pacific Corp. 829 So. 2d 450 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • Dugas v. Derouen 824 So. 2d 475 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
  • Grimes v. Patterson Insurance Co. 822 So. 2d 199 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    [ , supra at 1333 (La.1978), ] Appellate courts must constantly have in mind that their initial review function is not to decide factual issues de novo....
  • Gregor v. Argenot Great Central Ins. Co. 817 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • Perkins v. Allstate Indem. Ins. Co. 821 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Co., set forth guidelines to assist courts in determining the degree of negligence assessable to joint tortfeasors.
  • Rodriguez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 820 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • Taylor v. Entergy Corp. 816 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Co., the Supreme Court enunciated the following six factors to be applied in comparing the degrees of 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)
  • McGrail v. Lee 814 So. 2d 729 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Co., the trier of fact will compare the relative fault of the parties in the assessment of liability.
  • Gorton v. Ouachita Parish Police Jury 814 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Co., which held that: 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
  • Landry v. Bellanger 813 So. 2d 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    2d Cir.1986), writs denied and 117 (La.1987), to reach the same result as our earlier "mitigation" jurisprudence, i.e., a reduction of the damages recoverable *607 by a battery victim where the victim's behavior provoked the attack.
  • Vallien v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Transp. and Dev. 812 So. 2d 894 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
  • McBride v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 815 So. 2d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • Reaux v. City of New Orleans 815 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • Rogers v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 813 So. 2d 495 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • Johnson Ex Rel. Johnson v. Dumas 811 So. 2d 1085 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    Co., the supreme court established guidelines for apportionment of fault under comparative negligence: 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 in this i
  • Junot v. Morgan 818 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • Wiley v. City of New Orleans 809 So. 2d 151 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
  • Harvey v. Cole 808 So. 2d 771 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
  • Bonnette v. Conoco, Inc. 801 So. 2d 501 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
  • Bertrand v. Henry 815 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Co., the supreme court explained that, to determine 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 relationship between the conduct and the damages: In assessing the nature of the conduct of the parties, various f
  • Cox v. Moore 805 So. 2d 277 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Co., the supreme court explained that, to determine 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 relationship between the conduct and the damages: In assessing the nature of the conduct of the parties, various f
  • Carter v. Cox Cable, New Orleans 806 So. 2d 24 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Co., 84-2158 (La.1985), , quoting from Section 2(b) of the Uniform Comparative Fault Act and the Comments thereto: 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.
  • Wheelis v. CGU INS. 803 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • Adams v. Parish of East Baton Rouge 804 So. 2d 679 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • Trahan v. Asphalt Associates, Inc. 800 So. 2d 18 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
  • Wallmuth v. Rapides Parish School Bd. 802 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Co., : 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 what was soug
  • White v. Austin 798 So. 2d 1127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
  • Taylor v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 796 So. 2d 802 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
  • Hughes v. Scottsdale Ins. Co. 793 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • Jones v. Cobb 793 So. 2d 495 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    NOTES [1] While the leading case on Louisiana's comparative fault system, involved a 12-year-old's accidental shooting of another hunter, the non-custodian father of the child was held independently negligent and the Turner ruling and strict liability were never discussed by the court.
  • Priest v. City of Bastrop 792 So. 2d 80 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    the trier of fact will compare the relative fault of the parties in the assessment of liability.
  • Young v. Costello 790 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • Smith v. Roussel 809 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    in apportioning fault between Allstate and the Smiths.
  • State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Little 794 So. 2d 927 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Dickens v. Commercial Union Ins., 99,0698 (La.App.
  • Fontenot v. Southwestern Offshore Corp. 787 So. 2d 588 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Co., (1985) for apportioning fault, demonstrates that Southwestern should have been apportioned with a greater percentage of the fault.
  • Williams v. Regional Transit Authority/Transit Management of Southeast Louisiana 788 So. 2d 1263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
  • McCullin v. US Agencies Cas. Ins. Co. 786 So. 2d 269 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co., Ramirez, supra; Gray v. *276 Louisiana Downs, supra ; (La.App.
  • Newman v. Fernwood Transportation 785 So. 2d 1026 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Co., Arceneaux, supra at 1333 .
  • Schiro v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEVELOPMENT 808 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth five factors to be considered in apportioning fault: (1) whether the conduct resulted from inadvertence or involved an awareness of the danger; (2) the extent of the risk created by the conduct; (3) the significance of what was sought by the conduct; (4) the capaci