Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite American Bank v. Saxena, 553 So. 2d 836.

68 citing documents.

Valerie Titus v. Mark Titus La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
Jma Painters, LLC v. the McDonnel Group, LLC, and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee for RFMSI 2005S7 v. Walter C. Dumas La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2023
App. 1 st Cir. 416/ 18), 2018 WL 1663020, * 3 ( unpublished), - 846 ( La.
Wachovia Mortgage Corporation v. Stephen Todd Hoover La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
App. 1st Cir. 5 4/ 6/ 18), 2018 WL 1663020 * 3 (unpublished), - 846 ( La.
Scott Gurney, in his capacity as the Trustee of the Gurney Family Trust v. Josh P. McCoy La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC Versus Olethia Davis La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2021
“The plea of payment is an affirmative defense, and the burden is upon the pleader to prove payment.” (La.
Admin-Media, LLC v. Ac of Lafayette, L.L.C. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
Law Industries, LLC v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
Alicia Johnson Butler v. Begnauds, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
In support of its argument, wherein a bank filed three subsequently consolidated actions seeking to enforce five delinquent promissory notes.
Butler v. Begnauds, LLC 273 So. 3d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
*415 In support of its argument, relator cites American Bank v. Saxena , wherein a bank filed three subsequently consolidated actions seeking to enforce five delinquent promissory notes.
Leigh Trades, L.L.C. v. Non-Flood Prot. Assets Mgmt. Auth. 274 So. 3d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
The Louisiana Supreme Court, in American Bank v. Saxena , , 844 (La.
Joseph Stelly v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
“[T]he opposing party is not entitled to have the motion denied on the mere hope that at trial he will be able to discredit movant’s evidence; he must, at the hearing, be able to point out to the court something indicating the existence of a triable issue of material fact.” -46 (La.1989).
Stelly v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. 266 So. 3d 395 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
American Bank v. Saxena , , 845-46 (La.
Riedel v. Fenasci 269 So. 3d 995 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 1st Cir. 4/6/18), 2018 WL 1663020 (unpublished), citing American Bank v. Saxena , , 845-846 (La.
In re Jarrell 240 So. 3d 266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 5 Cir. 5/14/14), , 74 (citing American Bank v. Saxena , (La.
Whitney Bank v. Garden Gate New Orleans, L.L.C. 236 So. 3d 774 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
In American Bank v. Saxena , , 846 (La.
H&E Equipment Services, Inc. v. Sugar & Power International, LLC 215 So. 3d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Sonnier v. Gordon 194 So. 3d 47 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
Hancock Bank of Louisiana v. C & O Enterprises, LLC 168 So. 3d 595 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Pannagl v. Kelly 142 So. 3d 70 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
the Louisiana Supreme Court held that summary judgment is the appropriate procedural device to enforce a negotiable instrument when the defendant establishes no defense against enforcement.
Bell Foundry Co. v. Lonnie McCurry's Four Wheel Drive Center, Inc. 75 So. 3d 529 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
art. 1893; Aldredge, supra
ESTATE OF PITTMAN v. Pittman 69 So. 3d 1254 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Gulf Coast Bank and Trust Co. v. Elmore 57 So. 3d 553 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Mapp Construction, LLC v. Southgate Penthouses, LLC 29 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
While noting that generally, an unliqui-dated claim for damages cannot be pleaded in compensation against a liquidated claim based on a promissory note, -845 (La.1989), this court further observed that while a liquidated sum cannot be offset by an unliquidated sum by operation of law, LSA-C.C.
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Daigle 10 So. 3d 288 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
FRANKLIN CREDIT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v. Gray 2 So. 3d 598 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
OBEY FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. v. Blue 980 So. 2d 907 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Moreover, the supreme court previously dealt with a
Obey Financial Group, Inc. v. Archie Blue, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Moreover, the supreme court previously dealt with a
Julian E. Long v. Linda Long Minton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Long v. Minton 955 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Talley v. Celestin 894 So. 2d 389 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
art. 966 the Supreme Court held that summary judgment is the appropriate procedural device to enforce a negotiable instrument when the defendant establishes no defense against enforcement.
Hurley State Bank v. Sharon Pickens La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
the Bank argues, Ms. Pickens’s unsupported testimony, coupled with the admission that she signed a contract, is insufficient to rebut the Bank’s case.
Sanders v. Russell 864 So. 2d 219 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Hurley State Bank v. Pickens 861 So. 2d 846 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
the Bank argues, Ms. Pickens’s unsupported testimony, coupled with the admission that she signed a contract, is insufficient to rebut the Bank’s case.
Hebert v. ANCO Insulation, Inc. 835 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
1st Cir.1985); Buck's Run Enterprises, Inc. v. Mapp Construction, Inc., XXXX-XXXX, p. 4 (La.App.
Johnson v. Drury 763 So. 2d 103 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
the Supreme Court held that summary judgment is the appropriate procedural device to enforce a negotiable instrument when the defendant establishes no defense against enforcement.
GULF COAST BANK & TRUST v. Donnaud's Inc. 759 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
Kavanaugh v. Long 698 So. 2d 730 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Schwegmann Bank and Trust Co. v. Dunne 693 So. 2d 349 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Day v. Delchamps, Inc. 694 So. 2d 1004 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Bockman v. Caraway 691 So. 2d 815 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
art. 966; Gleason v. State Farm, 27,297 (La.App.2d Cir. 08/23/95), , writ denied, 95-2358 (La.
First Nat. Bank v. Smith 691 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
which held that the bank was entitled to summary judgment when Saxena had established no defenses against the notes.
Lafitte v. Compton 690 So. 2d 872 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
art. 966; Gleason v. State Farm, 27,297 (La.App.
Gottsegen v. National Information Services, Inc. 688 So. 2d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
National Gypsum Co. v. Ace Wholesale 685 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Zellinger v. Amalgamated Clothing 683 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Art. 966; Hartford Accident & Indem.
Slocum-Stevens Ins. Agency, Inc. v. International Risk Consultants, Inc. 666 So. 2d 352 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
Art. 966; Freeman v. Moss Well *366 Service, Inc., writ denied
Whitney Nat. Bank v. Rockwell 661 So. 2d 1325 La. 1995
As to the principal demand, the court noted that a trial court should grant summary judgment on a promissory note when the debtor establishes no defense against enforcement
Washington v. State, Department of Transportation & Development 663 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Washington v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. 663 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995