Wallace v. KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL
Wallace v. KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL, 586 So. 2d 149 (La. 1991).
Cited by
- Boudreaux v. Bollinger Shipyard 197 So. 3d 761 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
- Brunet v. Avondale Industries, Inc. 772 So. 2d 974 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
- Thomas v. Armstrong World Industries 676 So. 2d 1185 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
- In Re Huddleston 595 So. 2d 1141 La. 1992
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Wallace v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. 578 So. 2d 206
- Mayer v. Valentine Sugars, Inc. 444 So. 2d 618
Opinion text
586 So.2d 149 (1991) Twila WALLACE, et al. v. KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL CORPORATION, et al. No. 91-C-1317. Supreme Court of Louisiana. September 27, 1991. *150 Prior report: 578 So.2d 206 . PER CURIAM. Plaintiffs' application for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed. The trial judge erred in maintaining the exception of no cause of action. See Mayer v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., 444 So.2d 618 (La.1984). On the other hand, the court of appeal erred in taking judicial notice of the adjudicative fact that asbestosis and lung cancer in the same person are necessarily causally related. A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute. La.Code of Evidence, art. 201. Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.