DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite White v. Monsanto Co., 585 So. 2d 1205.

182 citing documents.

  • Sanders v. Spector 673 So. 2d 1176 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    -1210 (La.1991), the Supreme Court repeated its "extreme and outrageous" test.
  • Ponthier v. Brown's Mfg., Inc. 671 So. 2d 1253 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
  • Lawson v. Straus 673 So. 2d 223 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
  • Stevenson v. Lavalco, Inc. 669 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • Stewart v. Parish of Jefferson 668 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
    The trial court erred in failing to find that Stewart's previously diagnosed anxiety condition established that he was not an individual of ordinary sensibilities, but rather was exceptionally susceptible to emotional distress, standard to Pete and Schomaker's actions.
  • Bridges v. Carl E. Woodward, Inc. 663 So. 2d 458 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
    the Louisiana Supreme Court further explained the meaning of "intentional act" under LSA-R.S.
  • Ballex v. Naccari 663 So. 2d 173 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
  • Guilbeaux v. Times of Acadiana, Inc. 661 So. 2d 1027 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
  • Landry v. Uniroyal Chemical Co., Inc. 653 So. 2d 1199 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
    the supreme court explained the meaning of "intentional act" under Revised Statute 23:1032(B): [T]he person who acts either (1) consciously desires the physical result of his act, whatever the likelihood of that result happening from his conduct; or (2) knows that that result is substantially certain
  • Scamardo v. Dunaway 650 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
  • Jeansonne v. Wick Pub. Co. 646 So. 2d 1212 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
    In support of these allegations
  • Preis v. Durio 649 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    the plaintiffs have not alleged facts to show that the conduct of the defendants was extreme and outrageous and thus have failed to state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
  • Kosmala v. Paul 644 So. 2d 856 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
  • Wright v. Otis Engineering Corp. 643 So. 2d 484 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
  • White v. White 641 So. 2d 538 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    Further, in maintaining the exception of no cause of action, the trial judge reasoned that Virginia did not state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress because her allegations failed to meet the standards *541
  • Dufour v. Westlawn Cemeteries, Inc. 639 So. 2d 843 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
  • Walker v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. 640 So. 2d 794 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    [sic] The term `willful' has generally been given the same meaning in the law as intentional—i.e., that the result which occurred was intended by the actor.
  • Leger v. Hardy Rice Drier, Inc. 640 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
  • Portie v. Devall Towing & Boat Service, Inc. 637 So. 2d 1061 La. 1994
  • Mavromatis v. Lou-Mar, Inc. 632 So. 2d 828 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
  • Vallery v. Southern Baptist Hosp. 630 So. 2d 861 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    (where co-employee "should have known" he would produce harmful consequences the "intentional act" exception was not applicable).
  • Pylant v. Lofton 626 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    (adopting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46).
  • Bryant v. Giani Inv. Co. 626 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    (Obscene and unjustified tirade at employee by enraged supervisor not actionable as intentional infliction of emotional distress).
  • Smith v. Atkins 622 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    However, even if this issue were properly before this court, the court held that a plaintiff seeking recovery for intentional infliction of emotional distress must establish that 1) defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous, 2) the emotional distress suffered by plaintiff was severe, and 3) defendant desired to inflict sever emotional distress or knew that
  • Taylor v. State 617 So. 2d 1198 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
  • Bolanos v. Madary 609 So. 2d 972 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
  • Bustamento v. Tucker 607 So. 2d 532 La. 1992
    The court also concluded that even assuming, as suggested by the district court, that a "cussing" occurred on March 3rd, the court opined: Not every verbal encounter can be converted into a tort.
  • Brown v. Diversified Hospitality Group, Inc. 600 So. 2d 902 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
  • Knight v. Cracker Barrel Stores, Inc. 597 So. 2d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
  • Korson v. Independence Mall I, Ltd. 595 So. 2d 1174 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
    in discussing the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress: [t]the extreme and outrageous character of the conduct may arise from an abuse by the actor of a position, or a relation with the other, which gives him actual or apparent authority over the other, or power to affect his int
  • Beaudoin v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. 594 So. 2d 1049 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
  • Massey v. G.B. Cooley Hospital for Retarded Citizens 593 So. 2d 460 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992