Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Burton v. Foret, 498 So. 2d 706.

34 citing documents.

Evangelia Bilalis v. Wallace Drennan and Zurich American Insurance Company La. 2025
The date of judicial demand is “the day on which a party files a demand or claim for relief,” or put another way, “the date of plaintiff’s first judicial claim against all parties responsible for a single tortious occurrence.” -12 (La.
Jill Stauder and Shelly Stauder, Individually and on Behalf of the David Stauder, Jr. v. Shell Oil Company, … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
UCC maintains that because the Stauders’ claim against UCC does not arise out of a “single tortious occurrence” with the six original defendants it should not have to pay judicial interest dating back to the filing of the Stauders’ original petition.
George Raymond Williams, M.D., Orthopaedic Surgery, a Professional Medical, LLC v. Sif Consultants of Louisiana, Inc., Risk Management … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
Bosley v. Oliphint Enters., LLC 244 So. 3d 692 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
App. 1 Cir.), aff'd on other ground , (1986).
Washington v. Waring 142 So. 3d 40 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Schulingkamp v. Carter 984 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
[2] *800 And further, makes clear that "[w]here defendants are solidarity liable, they are jointly and severally liable for the entire debt, which would include interest from the date on which plaintiff made judicial demand on the first of [those] parties."
Amy Chesne v. Mark M. Mayeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Chesne v. Mayeaux 865 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Ibrahim v. Hawkins 845 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
-13 (La.1986), the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that legal interest runs from the plaintiff's first judicial claim against any party responsible for a single tortious act.
National Building & Contracting Co. v. Alerion Bank & Trust Co. 832 So. 2d 341 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Similarly, is also not applicable.
Trentecosta v. Beck 786 So. 2d 885 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
Martin v. Champion Ins. Co. 656 So. 2d 991 La. 1995
we established that legal interest runs from the plaintiff's first judicial claim against any party responsible for a single tortious act.
Sanders v. Wysocki 655 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Whitson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 647 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
2d Cir.), affirmed as amended on other grounds
Hackman v. Southern Farm Bureau Ins. Co. 629 So. 2d 531 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1993
Ridenour v. Wausau Ins. Co. 627 So. 2d 141 La. 1993
we addressed the application of this statute to a UM insurer.
Hogan v. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. 607 So. 2d 747 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
Cole v. Celotex Corp. 599 So. 2d 1058 La. 1992
Construing this statutory provision, that: Where defendants are solidarily liable, they are jointly and severally liable for the entire debt, which would include interest from the date on which plaintiff made judicial demand on the first of those parties.
Cole v. Celotex Corp. 588 So. 2d 376 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
Plaintiffs contend Merchant is a (La.
Holt v. Rapides Parish Police Jury 574 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
1986), affirmed as amended, (overhanging willow tree obscuring part of the roadway); (La.App.
Valet v. City of Hammond 577 So. 2d 155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
2nd Cir.1986), amended and affirmed on other grounds
Nichols v. Alonzo 575 So. 2d 403 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Finally, the court held that policy provisions which provided for legal interest from date of judgment were unenforceable because they conflicted with the public policy of the state expressed in R.S.
Keith v. Comco Insurance Co. 574 So. 2d 1270 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Keith v. Comco Ins. Co. 574 So. 2d 1270 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Hubert v. Martin 572 So. 2d 659 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Hoefly v. Government Employees Ins.
Fruge v. Thornhill 560 So. 2d 909 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
1st Cir.), affirmed, (1986) .
Tesvich v. 3-A's Towing Co. 547 So. 2d 1106 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
13:4203; -713 (La.1986); Plauche v. Consolidated Companies, Inc., 235 La.
Guitreau v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 540 So. 2d 1097 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Thompson v. PetroUnited Terminals, Inc. 536 So. 2d 504 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Kellis v. Farber 523 So. 2d 843 La. 1988
Pugh v. Gondrella 522 So. 2d 1257 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Hoefly v. Government Employees Ins.
Menendez v. Continental Ins. Co. 515 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
Peacock's, Inc. v. Shreveport Alarm Co. 510 So. 2d 387 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
mandates our agreement with Peacock's contention.
LeBouef v. Gross 506 So. 2d 879 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987