Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Quinlan v. Liberty Bank and Trust Co., 575 So. 2d 336.

20 citing documents.

Mentz Construction Services, Inc. v. Poche 87 So. 3d 273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
further the statute affords a person sustaining any other type of tortious loss or damage a direct action against the tort-feasor’s insurer.”
Rider v. Ambeau 100 So. 3d 849 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
(providing that the caption of an insurance policy is pertinent in determining the nature of the policy).
Chicago Property Interests, L.L.C. v. Broussard 8 So. 3d 42 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Scott Const. Co. v. Trinity Oilfield Const. 960 So. 2d 1170 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Mossy Motors, Inc. v. Cameras America 898 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
See also Quinlan v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co., -349 (La.1990).
Travis Cooper v. Louisiana Deptartment of Public Works La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Cooper v. La. Dept. of Public Works 870 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Walker v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. 850 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Webre v. Fabre 800 So. 2d 1036 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
In its judgment, the trial court held, relying on Quinlan v. Liberty Bank & Trust Company, that the main difference between liability insurance and indemnity insurance is that under a liability contract, the insurer must make payment even though the insured has not suffered an actual loss, but in an indemnity contract, the insurer only indemnifies the insured after he has suffered an actual loss.
Donaldson v. United Community Ins. Co. 741 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
As support for their assertion, and Black v. First City Bank, 94-0423 (La.9/6/94); , two more recent Supreme Court decisions which they believe overruled Fontenot and Arrow Trucking.
Aucoin v. State Through Dept. of Transp. and Dev. 712 So. 2d 62 La. 1998
5 Cir.), writ denied, Quinlan v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co., (indemnity contract).
Becnel v. United Gas Pipeline Co. 655 So. 2d 409 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
NAT. UNION FIRE INS. CO. v. Cagle 649 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
In Quinlan v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co., the Supreme Court determined that the Direct Action Statute overrides such a policy provision.
Black v. First City Bank 642 So. 2d 151 La. 1994
STATE, THROUGH DOTD. v. Acadia Parish 631 So. 2d 611 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
However, the Supreme Court adopted the following analysis in applying the statute: a victim who sustains either personal injury or corporeal property damage may directly sue the tortfeasor's insurer, regardless of whether the insurer has framed the policy as a liability or an indemnity contract; a tort victim who su
Grubbs v. Gulf Intern. Marine, Inc. 625 So. 2d 495 La. 1993
Likewise, that "the statute applies to any insurance against the liability of the insured for the personal injury or corporeal property damage to a tort victim, regardless of whether the policy is framed in liability or indemnity terms ..."
Killingsworth v. United Mercantile Bank 623 So. 2d 1384 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
See Quinlan v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co.
Giannouleas v. Phoenix Maritime Agencies, Inc. 621 So. 2d 1131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
Hae Woo Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp. 605 So. 2d 187 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
Thompson v. Temple 580 So. 2d 1133 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991