Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Forest v. STATE EX REL. LOUISIANA DEPT. OF TRANSP. AND DEV., 493 So. 2d 563.

55 citing documents.

Abby Gail Garcie v. City of Natchitoches La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
Chreene v. Howard C. Prince, Jr. & Rowdy Adventures, L. L.C. 256 So. 3d 501 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
Richardson v. Lloyds 136 So. 3d 953 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
Forest v. *957 State DOTD
Hammond v. PLAQUEMINES PARISH 982 So. 2d 204 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
and Development, -80 (La.App.
Garner v. Memorial Medical Center 872 So. 2d 1229 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
and Development, -80 (La.App.
Vermilion Parish Police Jury v. Tim Albert La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Vermilion Parish Police Jury v. Albert 867 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Zapata v. Cormier 858 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Under the duty-risk analysis established by the Louisiana Supreme Court and set forth in Forest v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, (La.
Toston v. Pardon 847 So. 2d 119 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Faye v. State, Department of Transportation & Development 702 So. 2d 1036 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Todd v. State 685 So. 2d 313 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp., Vicknair v. Hibernia Bldg.
Hardenstein v. COOK CONST. INC. 691 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Warren v. Campagna 686 So. 2d 969 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
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp., Vicknair v. Hibernia Bldg.
Miller v. STATE, DOTD 679 So. 2d 134 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Finally, under the facts of this case, we cannot even cloak Allen with the status of "unwary driver" and hold him to a lesser standard, as in Forest v. State, Through Louisiana D. of Transp., (La.
Fayard v. Landry 651 So. 2d 1370 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
Forest v. State, Department of Transportation and Development
Maeder v. Williams 652 So. 2d 1005 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Smith v. LOUISIANA HEALTH & HUMAN RES. 637 So. 2d 1177 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
and Development, a motorist crashed through a road barricade because the barricade had not been marked properly and there was no proper sign warning of the necessary detour.
Polk v. Blanque 633 So. 2d 1382 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Dept. of Transportation, at 570.
Hutzler v. Cole 633 So. 2d 1319 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
The Rick case cites three other cases for this statement: Forest v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, (La.
Rick v. STATE, DOTD 630 So. 2d 1271 La. 1994
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp., : Vicknair v. Hibernia Bldg.
Poland v. Glenn 623 So. 2d 227 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
See, Forest v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, (La.App.
Rick v. State, Through DOTD 619 So. 2d 1149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
Forest v. State, Department of Transportation
Faucheaux v. Terrebonne Consol. Government 615 So. 2d 289 La. 1993
Wise v. Lapworth 614 So. 2d 728 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1993
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp., Reese v. Griffith, supra.
Hebert v. Taco Bell Corp. 613 So. 2d 729 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
Dept. of Transportation, at 570.
Roberts v. Benoit 605 So. 2d 1032 La. 1992
& Development, Weber v. Charity Hosp.
Glynn v. Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets, Inc. 597 So. 2d 9 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
Forest v. State, Through the Louisiana Dept. of Transportation and Development
Buckbee v. Aweco, Inc. 587 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Our Supreme Court stated in Forest v. State, Through Louisiana D. of Transp., that in cases for recovery on the grounds of negligence, the court must consider the asserted negligence utilizing a duty-risk analysis.
Blanchard v. Republic Insurance Group 576 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1991
Tracy, supra at 273 ; (5th Cir.1987), writ denied, [citing to Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana Department of Transportá *1229 tion, ].
Breaux v. Vicknair 575 So. 2d 840 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
5 Cir.1989) citing Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp.
Reese v. Griffith 568 So. 2d 1146 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp.
Williams v. Markel Lumber Co. 566 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
Forest v. State, thru Louisiana Department of Transportation, Carter v. City Parish Government, supra ; LeBlanc v. Department of Highways, supra ; Hill v. Lundin & Associate Inc., supra .
Langley v. Oxford Chemicals, Inc. 559 So. 2d 520 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
471 , (1962); Forest v. State, through DOTD
Lejeune v. Rayne Branch Hosp. 556 So. 2d 559 La. 1990
Guidry v. Sam Grimmett, Inc. 557 So. 2d 249 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana Dept. of Transp., rehearing den.; Harris v. Pizza Hut of Louisiana, Inc., Brady v. State, Through Louisiana Health and Human Res.
McManus v. Barber Bros. Contracting Co. 552 So. 2d 1017 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
II In Forest v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the utilization of duty-risk analysis in considering asserted negligence, when speaking through Justice Calogero it held: “This Court has established that, in cases for recovery on the grounds of negligence, the court must consider the asserted negligence utilizing a duty-r
Alford v. Estate of Zanca 552 So. 2d 7 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp.
Worley v. Winston 550 So. 2d 694 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
Forest v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, Shelton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., (La.
Domingue v. H & S Construction Co. 546 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Humphries v. LA. DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS, DIV. OF TRANSP. 545 So. 2d 610 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
In Forest v. State, Thru Louisiana D. of Transp., the Supreme Court re-established that, in cases for recovery on the grounds of negligence, the court must consider the asserted negligence utilizing a duty-risk analysis.
LeJeune v. Rayne Branch Hospital 539 So. 2d 849 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
T.D., writ granted, affirmed, and in an action to recover damages to property, Fontenot v. Magnolia Petr.
Guist v. I-49 Truck Plaza 539 So. 2d 1255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Luckette v. Orkin Exterminating Co. 534 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Highlands Ins. Co. v. Missouri Pacific RR Co. 532 So. 2d 317 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Vidrine v. Government Employees Ins. Co. 528 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
3rd Cir.1986), affirmed, (La.
Murjani v. Thibeaux 521 So. 2d 1225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
See Forest v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, Dixie Drive It Yourself System, Inc. v. American Beverage Co., 242 La.
Brady v. State ex rel. Louisiana Health & Human Resources Administration 525 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
The Louisiana Supreme Court in Forest v. State, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, recently restated the elements of the duty-risk analysis.
Adamson v. City of Lafayette 521 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Dept. of Transp., a case which agreed with our earlier pronouncements in Ledbetter and Veazey , is applicable: "A public authority is liable in solido with a motorist when its negligence, combined with that of a motorist, is found to be the cause of the accident."
Zellers v. National American Ins. Co. 514 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
Forest v. State, thru Louisiana D. of Transp.