Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Housley v. Cerise, 579 So. 2d 973.
- Craig Steven Arabie v. Citgo Petroleum Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Arabie v. Citgo Petroleum Corp. 49 So. 3d 529 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
-
Patricia Case and Patrick Case v. Shelter Insurance Company
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
See generally, Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Case v. Shelter Insurance Co.
48 So. 3d 1196
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
See generally, Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
- Williams v. Stewart 46 So. 3d 266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
-
Wynne v. Trotter
46 So. 3d 678
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
the court found that an injury is presumed to have been caused by an accident if: before the accident, the injured person was in good health, but commencing with the accident, the symptoms of the disabling condition appear and continuously manifests themselves afterwards, providing that the medical evi
-
Virginia Peoples, Et Ux. v. Fred's Stores of Tennessee, Inc.
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
We have previously emphasized the principle that “if the trial court or jury’s findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse, even if convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Stobart, 617 So.2d at 882-83 ( (quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Peoples v. Fred's Stores of Tennessee, Inc.
38 So. 3d 1209
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
We have previously emphasized the principle that “if the trial court or jury’s findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse, even if convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Stobart, 617 So.2d at 882 -83 ( (quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Kimberly Carter v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Ins. Co.
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Smith, 523 So.2d at 822; Hastings, 498 So.2d at 720.
-
Carter v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance
40 So. 3d 327
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Smith, 523 So.2d at 822 ; Rosell *331 v. ESCO, Hastings, 498 So.2d at 720 ....
- Alice Mabel Crews v. Broussard Plumbing and Heating La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
-
Miller v. Tulane University Hospital
38 So. 3d 1142
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Additionally, the plaintiffs argued that no deposition or affidavit testimony to establish causation was necessary because they were entitled to a
- Crews v. BROUSSARD PLUMBING AND HEATING 38 So. 3d 1097 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- Thongsavanh v. Schexnayder 40 So. 3d 989 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- David Charlie v. Leno Hai Congtang, M.D. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Charlie v. Hai Congtang 37 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
-
Peter Norman Broussard, Jr. v. Theta Charles Compton
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
We have previously emphasized the principle that “if the trial court or jury’s findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse, even if convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Stobart, 617 So.2d at 882-83 ((quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Broussard v. Compton
36 So. 3d 376
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
We have previously emphasized the principle that “if the trial court or jury’s findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse, even if convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Stobart, 617 So.2d at 882 -83 ((quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Scott Ferguson v. Loewer Powersports & Equipment
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
The basis for this principle of review is grounded not only upon the better capacity of the trial court to evaluate live witnesses, but also upon the proper allocation of trial and appellate functions between the respective courts.
- Ferguson v. LOEWER POWERSPORTS & EQUIPMENT 33 So. 3d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
- Vanna Darlene McManus, Etc. v. State of La., Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
-
Kelly v. AME JANITORIAL SERVICES CO.
33 So. 3d 358
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
Housley Presumption A plaintiff may be assisted in meeting his burden of proof that an injury is causally related to an accident by a
- David Guidry v. Gulf Coast Coil Tubing La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
- Guidry v. GULF COAST COIL TUBING 24 So. 3d 1019 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
- Gonzales v. BUILD-A-BEAR WORKSHOP, INC. 30 So. 3d 27 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2009
- Chanda Prather Richardson v. Steven Todd Richardson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
- Richardson v. Richardson 25 So. 3d 203 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
-
In Re Benge
24 So. 3d 822
La. 2009
Judge Benge was referring to Maranto v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 94-2603, 94-2615 (La.2/20/95), , in which this court observed that a
-
Liz Marie Noel Smith v. Allstate Insurance Company
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Additionally, a reviewing court must keep in mind that if a trial court’s findings are reasonable based upon the entire record and evidence, an appellate court may not reverse said findings even if it is “convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed that evidence differently.” (quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mut.
-
Yee v. Imperial Fire & Casualty Ins. Co.
25 So. 3d 872
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Yee concedes he owes the burden of proving causation by a preponderance of the evidence, as he was in good health before the accident, symptoms began after the accident and continuously manifested themselves afterward, and the medical evidence shows a reasonable possibility of a causal connection.
-
Montgomery v. Kedgy
21 So. 3d 980
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Mar-anto, supra; Saunders v. ANPAC Loui *984 siana Insurance Co., 43,405 (La.App.
-
Watters v. Department of Social Services
15 So. 3d 1128
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
The "Housley presumption,” provides that a medical condition producing disability is presumed to have resulted from an accident, if, before the accident the injured *1148 person was in good health, but shortly after the accident, the disabling condition manifested itself.
-
Shawn Bernard v. the Hartford Insurance Company
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
“Whether an accident caused a person’s injuries is a question of fact which should not be reversed on appeal absent manifest error.” ().
-
State of Louisiana v. Timothy Glen Granger
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
See generally, Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Shannon Menard v. Lafayette Ins. Co.
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Specifically, she argues the trial court erred in allowing Dr. David Aiken, the defendant’s medical expert, “to offer causation speculation inconsistent” with the supreme court’s in not empaneling alternate jurors during the June 23, 2008 selection process; in continuing the June 23 trial date 2 The jury’s consortium award to the minor child is not at issue in this appeal.
-
Menard v. Lafayette Insurance
13 So. 3d 794
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Specifically, she argues the trial court erred in allowing Dr. David Aiken, the defendant’s medical expert, “to offer causation speculation inconsistent” with the supreme court’s in not empaneling alternate jurors during the June 23, 2008 selection process; in continuing the June 23 trial date ^without doing a more complete investigation of the defense counsel’s alleged illness; and in releasing two of the jurors from the July 23, 2008 trial after their selection on June 23, 2008.
-
State v. Granger
11 So. 3d 695
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
See generally, Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
-
Bernard v. Hartford Insurance
12 So. 3d 1098
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
“Whether an accident caused a person’s injuries is a question of fact which should not be reversed on appeal absent manifest error.” ().
- Ruffin v. Burton 34 So. 3d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
- Richard v. BAYOU LAFOURCHE FRESH WATER DISTRICT 9 So. 3d 354 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
-
Merdis Cole v. Brookshire Grocery Company
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Additionally, a reviewing court must keep in mind that if a trial court’s findings are reasonable based upon the entire record and evidence, an appellate court may not reverse said findings even if it is “convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed that evidence differently.” (quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mut.
-
Cole v. Brookshire Grocery Co.
5 So. 3d 1010
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Additionally, a reviewing court must keep in mind that if a trial court’s findings are reasonable based upon the entire record and evidence, an appellate court may not reverse said findings even if it is “convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed that evidence differently.” (quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mut.
-
Ennis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
9 So. 3d 899
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
the Supreme Court held that a plaintiffs disability is presumed to have resulted from an accident, if: (1) the plaintiff was in good health before the accident; (2) that commencing with the accident, the symptoms of the plaintiffs disabling condition appeared and continuously manifested themselves afterward
- Harrington v. Wilson 8 So. 3d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
-
Marshall Ex Rel. Minor Chil. v. Air Liquide-Big Three, Inc.
2 So. 3d 541
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
at 882-883 () (quoting Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins.
- Brown v. Trask 998 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
- Newsome v. New Orleans Saints 996 So. 2d 637 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
-
Billy Wayne Rachal, Jr. v. Kimberly W. Gilchrist
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
1 However, the jury considered this case after being instructed on the potential applicability of Housley.
- Rachal v. Gilchrist 995 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
- Slone v. Greber 989 So. 2d 273 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008