Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., 609 So. 2d 921.

28 citing documents.

Rebardi v. Crewboats, Inc. 906 So. 2d 579 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
See Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Rebardi v. Crewboats, Inc. 906 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
See Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Williams v. Maritime, Inc. 889 So. 2d 1055 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc. (La.App.
Thonn v. Cook 863 So. 2d 628 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
[9] Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Hennegan v. Cooper/T. Smith Stevedoring Co. 837 So. 2d 96 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Gregor v. Argenot Great Central Ins. Co. 817 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Wright v. Hollywood Marine, Inc. 789 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Wood v. Subsea International, Inc. 766 So. 2d 563 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Lacoste v. Crochet 751 So. 2d 998 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
4 Cir. 11/17/1992), , rehearing denied (12/16/1992), writ denied (La.03/12/1993), equivocated on whether or not the trial court erred when it "refused to let plaintiff introduce a financial statement reflecting the earnings of Brown & Root and its percentage of earnings in relation to its parent corporation, Halliburton & Co
Burgess v. CF Bean Corp. 743 So. 2d 251 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Brodtmann v. Duke 708 So. 2d 447 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
Further, the court in Bridgett noted that only two Louisiana courts have concluded that punitive damages remain recoverable under general maritime law: this circuit in Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Foster v. Destin Trading Corp. 700 So. 2d 199 La. 1997
3 Cir.1994) writ denied Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Howell v. American Cas. Co. of Reading 691 So. 2d 715 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Milstead v. Diamond M Offshore, Inc. 676 So. 2d 89 La. 1996
4th Cir. 1993) (federal standard of review applicable in general maritime case); Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., -29 (La.App.
Lyons v. Fleet Operators, Inc. 676 So. 2d 182 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Guillie v. Marine Towing, Inc. 670 So. 2d 1298 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Stevens v. Winn-Dixie of Louisiana 664 So. 2d 1207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
art. 1154; Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Dehart v. Ferruzzi U.S.A., Inc. 663 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Plaintiff counters this argument by relying on Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Angeron v. Martin 649 So. 2d 40 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
See Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.
Bridgett v. Odeco, Inc. 646 So. 2d 1249 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
In response, plaintiff relies on this Court's decision in Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., writ denied, cert.
Ellender v. Texaco, Inc. 640 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
See Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Comeaux v. Basin Marine, Inc. 640 So. 2d 833 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., -29 (La.App.
Fleming v. Smith 638 So. 2d 467 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
4 Cir.1993); Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Carmen v. Gonzalez 637 So. 2d 1108 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Davis v. Kreutzer 633 So. 2d 796 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Butler v. Zapata Haynie Corp. 633 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
621 (D.Alaska 1992); Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Gaston v. G & D Marine Services, Inc. 631 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.
Futrell v. Scott Truck and Tractor Co. 629 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc., (La.App.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by