88-C-0116 Precedential Reinstated Processed

Cracco v. Barras

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed February 25, 1988 · 520 So. 2d 371

Also decided on this docket: La., March 18, 1988 521 So. 2d 1159; La., February 12, 1988 519 So. 2d 136

Cited by

The Lathan Company v. State of Louisiana, Department of Education, Recovery School District and … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
Davis v. State Board of Certified Public Accountants 131 So. 3d 391 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
Buddy" Caldwell, Attorney General Ex Rel. State of Louisiana v. Janssen Pharmaceutical, Inc. " La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
Caldwell ex rel. State v. Janssen Pharmaceutical, Inc. 100 So. 3d 865 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
In Re Succession of Manheim 734 So. 2d 119 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
Reed v. Recard 744 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Bordelon v. Comeaux Furniture & Appliance, Inc. 701 So. 2d 1032 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
Trahan v. Savage Industries, Inc. 692 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Spear v. Tran 682 So. 2d 267 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Ferrier v. Jordache-Ditto's 662 So. 2d 14 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Jones v. Hartford Ins. Co. 560 So. 2d 442 La. 1990
Guedon and Associates, Inc. v. Haik 533 So. 2d 1256 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Frank L. Beier Radio v. Black Gold Marine 449 So. 2d 1014

Opinion text

520 So.2d 371 (1988) Alain F. CRACCO, M.D. v. Phillip J. BARRAS. No. 88-C-0116. Supreme Court of Louisiana. February 25, 1988. Rehearing Denied March 18, 1988. *372 Writ Granted. The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed and the judgment of the district court is reinstated for the following reasons: The reasons for judgment of the district judge were correct. It was not clearly wrong for the trial judge to have discounted the self-serving testimony of the plaintiff-physician, nor were the sums of money awarded to the defendant as set-off against the plaintiff's demand excessive. Furthermore, attorney's fees may be collected under R.S. 9:2781 only if written demand is made "correctly setting forth the amount owed." In this case the amount demanded, found to be subject to a set-off, was therefore not correct. Attorney's fee statutes must be construed strictly because the award of attorney fees is exceptional and penal in nature. Frank L. Beier Radio, Inc. v. Black Gold Marine, Inc., 449 So.2d 1014 (La.1984).