Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Polk v. STATE EX REL. DOTD, 538 So. 2d 239.

16 citing documents.

Parish of Livingston v. A&M Investment Properties, LLC La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
In Polk v. State,,through Department of Transportation & Development, ( La.
Ashley-Roxanne N'Dakpri, Lynn Schofield, and Evangela Michelle Robertson v. Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology; Steve Young; in his … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
See Poly v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, La.
St. Bernard Port v. Violet Dock Port, Inc. 255 So. 3d 57 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Michel v. State, Division of Administrative Law 167 So. 3d 654 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State, Department of Social Services ex rel. L.P. v. F.P. 140 So. 3d 328 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Carter v. STATE, CRIME VICTIMS REPAR. BD. 897 So. 2d 149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
and Development, -51 (La.1989), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the claimant had exhausted his administrative remedies as a practical matter when he did not seek similar minimal administrative review by the same agency officials who initially denied *154 the claim.
SAVANT INS. SER. INC. v. Central Oil and Supply Corp. 821 So. 2d 623 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
art. 926(1); Polk v. State, Through Department of Transportation and Development
Goodwin v. Tilley 799 So. 2d 768 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
3 Cir.1987), affirmed as amended on other grounds
Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Louisiana Insurance Rating Commission 713 So. 2d 1250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Polk v. State, Through Department of Transportation and Development
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. LA. INS. RATING COM'N 713 So. 2d 1250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Polk v. State, Through Department of Transportation and Development
Gallien v. Winn-Dixie 685 So. 2d 531 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
1988); modified on other grounds
KENNER FIREFIGHTERS ASS'N v. Kenner 685 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Polk v. State, through Dept. of Transportation and Development, (La.
State, Department of Transportation & Development v. Nelken 628 So. 2d 1279 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
In Polk v. State, through DOTD, at 249 (La.1989), the supreme court alluded to the fact that a person (or business) which moves onto real property while negotiations are underway for acquisition of that property (in whole or in part), as part of a public project, may be disqualified from receiving relocation expenses.
Jones v. Crow 633 So. 2d 247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
See Polk v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, -51 (La.1989); -17 (La.1988); (La.
Mariani v. Delta Beverage Co. 625 So. 2d 1088 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
App. 3 Cir.1987), affirmed as amended on other grounds
Crochet Equipment v. Board of Sup'rs 597 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
Polk v. State, Department of Transportation and Development