Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, 513 So. 2d 1138.

25 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Damari Jennings La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
This rule does not apply if the disclosure itself is privileged.” In Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, the supreme court stated: A litigant’s pleading of a claim or defense to which his attorney- client communications are relevant does not by such pleading alone waive his attorney-client privilege.
State of Louisiana v. Damari Jennings La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
This rule does not apply if the disclosure itself is privileged.” 8 In Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, the supreme court stated: A litigant’s pleading of a claim or defense to which his attorney- client communications are relevant does not by such pleading alone waive his attorney-client privilege.
St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal Dist. v. Violet Dock Port, Inc. 246 So. 3d 23 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Succession of Smith , , 1143-44 (La.
Freeman v. Phillips 66 Co. 208 So. 3d 437 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, (La.
Keith v. Keith 140 So. 3d 1202 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
677 , 66 L.Ed.2d 584 (1981); United States v. Edwards, 303 F.3d 606, 618 (5th Cir.2002); Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Weston P. Miller v. Cathy Broussard Miller La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
In Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, the supreme court addressed what constitutes a waiver of the attorney-client privilege.
Miller v. Miller 161 So. 3d 690 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, the supreme court addressed *695 what constitutes a waiver of the attorney-client privilege.
State of Louisiana v. A.D. L La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
The Louisiana Supreme Court adopted the “anticipatory waiver theory” in Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
State v. A.D.L. 92 So. 3d 989 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
The Louisiana Supreme Court adopted the “anticipatory waiver theory” in Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
State v. Dominguez 52 So. 3d 1117 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
The Louisiana Supreme Court adopted the “anticipatory waiver theory” in Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Wright v. Louisiana Power & Light 951 So. 2d 1058 La. 2007
Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Fremin v. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. 938 So. 2d 62 La. 2006
See Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh Pierson & Talley, (La.App.
Moss v. State 925 So. 2d 1185 La. 2006
Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
State v. Nightengale 818 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Boyd v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 775 So. 2d 649 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
The Louisiana Supreme Court in Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, (La.
In re Philip Morris, Inc. 706 So. 2d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
“The focus is on the privilege holder, and the sole concern is whether the privilege holder ‘has committed himself to a course of action that will require the disclosure of a privileged communication.’ ” (citing Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, ).
Kosmitis v. Bailey 685 So. 2d 1177 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
art. 506; Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Hebert v. Anderson 681 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, (the client is the holder of the privilege, and only he or his attorney or agent acting with his authority, can waive it).
State v. Caldwell 679 So. 2d 973 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Merhige v. Gubbles 657 So. 2d 1098 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Board of Commissioners of the New Orleans Exhibition Authority v. Missouri Pacific Railroad 647 So. 2d 340 La. 1994
art. 1452(B); Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Henricks v. Stumpf 613 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
R.S.:13:3734, Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley, [extensive discussion of the privilege immunity and the manner in which it can be waived]
Pitard v. Stillwater Transfer & Storage 589 So. 2d 1127 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
13:3734.3; Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
Clivens v. Abraham 582 So. 2d 1341 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
McNeely v. Board of River Port Pilot Commissioners 534 So. 2d 1255 La. 1988
By pleading good faith immunity based on advice of counsel, the Board has apparently placed privileged communications at issue since the defense “requires the introduction of privileged communications.” See Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley