Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Braud v. New England Ins. Co., 576 So. 2d 466.

59 citing documents.

Marlon Eaglin v. Eunice Police Department La. 2018
Tracy Ray Lomont v. Michelle Myer-Bennett and Xyz Insurance Company 172 So. 3d 620 La. 2015
art. 3492.7 this court explained: In the absence of an express warranty of result, a claim for legal malpractice is a delictual action subject to a liberative prescription of one year.
Chris Atherton D/B/A Atherton Intercontinental Concerts v. Rosteet Law Firm and Sidney Rosteet La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Vagelos v. Abramson 126 So. 3d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Gibsland Bank & Trust Co. v. Kitchens, Benton, Kitchens & Black (APLC) 114 So. 3d 529 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
Co., ], this Court clarified: Until the client suffers appreciable harm as a consequence of his attorney’s negligence, the client cannot establish a cause of action for malpractice.
Dwyer v. Binegar 95 So. 3d 565 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Co., stated that “[t]he mere breach of a professional duty, causing only nominal damages, speculative harm, or the threat of future harm — not yet realized— does not suffice to create a delictual action.” IsThis timely appeal followed.
Jenkins v. Starns 85 So. 3d 612 La. 2012
Rayne State Bank and Trust Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co., 483 *
Taylor v. Babin 13 So. 3d 633 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Hendrick v. ABC Insurance Company, 2000-2403, 2000-2349, p. 9 (La.5/15/01)
McGuire v. Mosley Rogers Title Co., LLC 997 So. 2d 23 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Branton v. Fox 968 So. 2d 356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
In Re Noe 958 So. 2d 617 La. 2007
Co., in which it cited with approval a number of Louisiana court of appeal cases that had applied the *626 doctrine, (La.
Explained Carter v. Haygood 892 So. 2d 1261 La. 2005
[8] we explained: *1271 More recently, we recognized that prescription will be suspended "during the attorney's continuous representation of the client regarding the specific subject matter in which the alleged wrongful act or omission occurred."
Don Leger v. John Haas Weinstein La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Leger v. Weinstein 885 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Don Leger v. John Haas Weinstein La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Smith v. Slattery 877 So. 2d 244 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
Augman v. Colwart 874 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
The leading case on the issue of when a
Benoit v. Archer 820 So. 2d 1275 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
5th Cir.1985), writ denied
Dauterive Contractors, Inc. v. Landry and Watkins 811 So. 2d 1242 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Creighton v. Bryant 793 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
Hendrick v. ABC Ins. Co. 787 So. 2d 283 La. 2001
Kennedy v. MacAluso 791 So. 2d 697 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
1st Cir.2/20/98), , argue that the "appreciable damage" analysis, applicable to determining when prescription began to run under the law prior to the enactment of La.
Gettys v. Sessions and Fishman, LLP 772 So. 2d 874 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
Lima, 595 So.2d at 630 ().
Hendrick v. ABC Ins. Co. 760 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Cardneaux v. Dollar 731 So. 2d 928 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Ledbetter v. Wheeler 722 So. 2d 382 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Latter v. ABC Ins. Co. 719 So. 2d 653 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
Co., and Bolton v. New England Ins.
Bopp Salon Services, Inc. v. Carraway 714 So. 2d 898 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
the Louisiana Supreme Court in a legal malpractice action followed its holding in Rayne State Bank and concluded that while the plaintiff did not sustain damage by virtue of the mere existence of deficiencies in the work product of his former ^attorney, a cause of action arises before a client sustains all
Carter v. Schott 707 So. 2d 1048 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
1992), that the cause of action for malpractice arises when any appreciable and actual harm flows from the negligent conduct.
Reeder v. North 701 So. 2d 1291 La. 1997
Perez v. Shook 703 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere and Denegre, LLP v. Homestead Ins. Co. 700 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Co., Rayne State Bank v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins.
Intense Health Care, Inc. v. Gore 692 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Short v. Giffin 682 So. 2d 249 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Hendrick v. STONE, PIGMAN, WALTHER, ETC. 677 So. 2d 716 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
subsequent to the filing of the original petition in these proceedings, held that the one (1) year prescriptive period for a legal malpractice action begins to run when the client sustains harm ...
Marsh Engineering, Inc. v. Parker 688 So. 2d 1042 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Phillip v. Home Ins. Co. 671 So. 2d 943 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Smith v. Boothe 669 So. 2d 682 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Bustamente v. Vezina 668 So. 2d 1286 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
National Council on Compensation Ins. v. QUIXX TEMPORARY SERVICES INC. 665 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Burris v. Vinet 664 So. 2d 1225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
4th Cir.1988), reversed on other grounds
Abbott & Meeks v. De La Vergne 643 So. 2d 827 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Sessions & Fishman v. Liquid Air Corp. 642 So. 2d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Jason v. Brown 637 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
she argues that because she had not suffered any "appreciable harm" as a result of Brown's failure to file suit until the date the prescription exception was maintained in the original suit, her malpractice suit was timely when filed on October 4, 1991.
Lirette v. Roe 631 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Co., Harvey v. Dixie Graphics, Inc., (La.App.
Jure v. Barker 619 So. 2d 717 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
Chiasson v. Doe 618 So. 2d 38 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
5th Cir.1985), writ denied
Roger v. Dufrene 613 So. 2d 947 La. 1993
Royal Fiberglass Pools, Inc. v. Cedars 614 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
Cole v. Celotex Corp. 599 So. 2d 1058 La. 1992
Co., Rayne State Bank and Trust Co. v. National Union Fire Ins.