Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Naman v. Schmidt, 541 So. 2d 265.
- D'AMBROSIA v. Lang 985 So. 2d 800 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
- Levy v. BAYOU INDUS. MAINTENANCE SERVICES 855 So. 2d 968 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
-
Pierce v. Milford
688 So. 2d 1093
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
3 Cir. 11/2/95); , (La.App.
-
Pierce v. Milford
688 So. 2d 1093
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
3 Cir. 11/2/95); , (La.App.
- Mormon v. Stine, Inc. 664 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
- Alleman v. Brownie Drilling Co. 647 So. 2d 371 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
- Myers v. Burger King Corp. 638 So. 2d 369 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
-
Jones v. Trailor
636 So. 2d 1112
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
They claim that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proving entitlement to future lost wages because she failed to present the testimony of either an economic expert or a vocational counselor, (La.App.
- Willis v. LeTulle 597 So. 2d 456 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
- Thomas v. Petrolane Gas Service Ltd. 588 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
- Aisole v. Dean 574 So. 2d 1248 La. 1991
- Lebaron v. Allstate Insurance Co. 572 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
- Weaver v. Siegling 569 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
- Whatley v. Regional Transit Authority 563 So. 2d 1194 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
-
Aisole v. Dean
560 So. 2d 647
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Bize v. Boyer, *652 (La.App.