DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Co-Op., Inc., 496 So. 2d 275.

31 citing documents.

  • Mark Patout v. Underwriters at Lloyd's London La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Co-op., Inc.
  • Smegal v. Gettys 48 So. 3d 431 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    2 The court noted that before the legislature rewrote Article 2323 establishing comparative fault, the only defenses to cases arising under Article 2321 were (1) fault of the victim, (2) fault of a third person, or (3) irresistible force, citing Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Coop., Inc.
  • Pat Swido and Tommie Swido v. Lafayette Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    Similarly, in Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., the court found that a bull did pose an unreasonable risk of harm in that it was explosively dangerous and posed an unreasonable hazard of injury.
  • Swido v. Lafayette Ins. Co. 916 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    Similarly, in Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., the court found that a bull did pose an unreasonable risk of harm in that it was explosively dangerous and posed an unreasonable hazard of injury.
  • Dumas v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF CULT., REC. 828 So. 2d 530 La. 2002
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Co-op., Inc., (La.
  • Maggio v. Robinson 741 So. 2d 103 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Coop, Inc., DeRouen v. Audirsch, 25,847 (La.App.
  • Soloco, Inc. v. Dupree 707 So. 2d 12 La. 1998
  • Boone v. Ricks 645 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
    2d Cir.1992), writ denied, -90 (La.App.
  • Smith v. Roan 605 So. 2d 10 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    See Boyer v. Seal, supra ; (La.
  • Smith v. American Indem. Ins. Co. 598 So. 2d 486 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    Similarly, in Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., the court found that a bull did pose an unreasonable risk of harm in that it was explosively dangerous and posed an unreasonable hazard of injury.
  • Guidry v. Frank Guidry Oil Co. 579 So. 2d 947 La. 1991
  • DuBois v. McGuire 579 So. 2d 1025 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
  • US F&G v. Hi-Tower Concrete Pumping Service 574 So. 2d 424 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
    Murray v. Ramada Inns, Inc., Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc. (La.
  • Andrade v. Shiers 564 So. 2d 787 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., [hereafter referred to as Rozell II ].
  • Boyer v. Seal 553 So. 2d 827 La. 1989
    this court, after finding that the plaintiff's injuries had been caused by the bull's behavior that "constituted an unreasonable hazard of injury," reversed the judgments of the lower courts rejecting recovery and remanded for the awarding of damages.
  • Hayes v. McFarland 535 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
  • Motion Industries, Inc. v. LeBlanc 532 So. 2d 498 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
  • Howard v. Allstate Ins. Co. 520 So. 2d 715 La. 1988
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., (La.
  • Murray v. Ramada Inns, Inc. 521 So. 2d 1123 La. 1988
    (II) THE ORIGINS AND EVOLUTION OF THE ASSUMPTION OF RISK DEFENSE (A) Development at Common Law Assumption of risk is a common law doctrine "not well developed in Louisiana," Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., (La.
  • Perro v. State 517 So. 2d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Co-Operative, Inc.
  • Chinigo v. Geismar Marine, Inc. 512 So. 2d 487 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    In Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., (La.
  • Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc. 512 So. 2d 496 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc.
  • Kleinpeter v. State ex rel. Department of Corrections 509 So. 2d 56 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    However, wherein the court stated: “Under C.C.
  • Howard v. Allstate Ins. Co. 510 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
    a recent case arising under Article 2321 prior to the enactment of the comparative fault statute, the Court held that the defense of victim fault was not available because the victim of a charging bull had not assumed the risk of his injuries.
  • Brannon v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. 507 So. 2d 194 La. 1987
  • Dupre v. Saenger Arts Center, Inc. 508 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • Goutierrez v. R & J Quarterhorse Stables 509 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    In the recent case of Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., the Louisiana Supreme Court thoroughly discussed the doctrine of assumption of the risk as follows: “To assume a risk, one must knowingly and voluntarily encounter a risk which caused him harm and must understand *555 and appreciate the risk involved and accept it as well as the inherent possibility of dang
  • Chatelain v. PROJECT SQUARE 505 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., (La.
  • Albers v. Fernandez 504 So. 2d 626 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc.
  • Duvalle v. Lake Kenilworth, Inc. 503 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Following the trial judge’s decision in this matter, the Supreme Court decided Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Coop., Inc., a pre-comparative negligence case founded upon strict liability under Civil Code article 2321 (responsibility of an animal owner for damage caused by the animal).
  • Dailey v. LebBlanc 497 So. 2d 1044 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Rozell v. Louisiana Animal Breeders Cooperative, Inc., et al, (La.App.