DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So. 2d 1234.

559 citing documents.

  • Wusthoff v. Bally's Casino Lakeshore Resort, Inc. 709 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., Darville v. Texaco, Inc.
  • Succession of Roniger 706 So. 2d 1025 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Best Fishing, Inc. v. Rancatore 706 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Moss v. Coury 704 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
    In conjunction with the defendant's appeal of this issue, this court issued a rule to show cause, by brief only, why the appeals in this case should not be dismissed in accordance with the position espoused in Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Blessing v. Rodrigue 703 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    art. 931; Montalvo v. Sondes, No. 93-2813 (La.5/23/94), ; Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Shinew v. Luciano Refrigerated Transport, Inc. 706 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Luciano cites Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., and asserts that a partial no right of action is not appealable.
  • Albarado v. Abadie 703 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
    Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Delta Testing & Inspection, Inc. v. Ernest N. Morial New Orleans Exhibition Hall Authority 699 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., *124 1235 (La.1993).
  • Wagner v. Lanasa 696 So. 2d 616 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
  • Harvey v. Amoco Production Co. 696 So. 2d 672 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    A "cause of action" as used in the context of a peremptory exception is defined in Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., as meaning the operative facts which give rise to the plaintiff's right to judicially assert the action against the defendant.
  • Douglass v. Alton Ochsner Medical Foundation 695 So. 2d 953 La. 1997
    Partial Summary Judgments In Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., , 1241 n. 12 (La.1993), we stated: We therefore reserve for another day the question of whether a partial summary judgment, that merely decides one of several claims, defenses, or issues without dismissing any party, is a final judgment which is authorized by Article 1915 and which therefore must be appealed immediate
  • Murphy v. L&L Marine Transp., Inc. 695 So. 2d 1045 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
    In this regard see Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., (La.App.
  • Connelly v. Lee 699 So. 2d 411 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., held that a judgment maintaining an exception of no cause of action and dismissing the action completely is a final judgment which is appealable.
  • Hays v. Volentine 694 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
  • Perez v. McCORMICK & COMPANY 693 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • McDonald v. Zapata Protein (USA), Inc. 693 So. 2d 296 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru S., Inc.
  • Ulmer v. Frisard 694 So. 2d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., et al., Scamardo v. Dunaway, 94-545 (La.App.
  • Jenkins v. Lindsey 693 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
    4 Cir 9/21/94), ; Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Kaufmann v. FLEET TIRE SERVICE OF LA. 691 So. 2d 811 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Brown v. Adolph 691 So. 2d 1321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Defendant cites the cases of Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., (La.App.
  • Bell v. Tensas Parish School Board 691 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
    art. 931; Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Acklin v. Acklin 690 So. 2d 869 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
    art. 931; Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Whitney National Bank v. Cambridge Realty Corp. 690 So. 2d 213 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • ALLIED SIGNAL INC. v. Jackson 691 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    [8] Everything on Wheels Subaru, (La.
  • Marcello v. Snell's Limbs & Braces of New Orleans, Inc. 688 So. 2d 677 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
    In Caire, supra, this court stated: |4In the Everything on Wheels Subaru decision [Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., ], the Louisiana Supreme Court held that any partial judgment which does not dismiss a party and is not expressly authorized by [C.C.P.]
  • Cowen v. Steiner 689 So. 2d 516 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru S., Inc.
  • Schell v. NK Enterprises, Inc. 688 So. 2d 68 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., et al, (La.App.
  • Boudreaux v. State 687 So. 2d 596 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Long v. Long 684 So. 2d 1099 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., Darville v. Texaco, Inc.
  • Landrum v. Board of Com'rs 685 So. 2d 382 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., (La.
  • National Gypsum Co. v. Ace Wholesale 685 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
    A ruling on this limited issue, which does not grant either party all or part of its requested relief and does not dismiss a party from the action, would be contrary to the precepts set out by the Supreme Court in Everything on Wheels Subaru v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Tolis v. Shields 684 So. 2d 523 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., Stovall v. Carimi, 95-0766 (La.App.
  • West v. Hilton Hotels Corp. 684 So. 2d 518 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subar ru South, Inc., , 1235 |4(La.l993) (footnote omitted).
  • A-I Nursery Registry, Inc. v. United Teacher Associates Insurance Co. 682 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • Succession of Fragala 680 So. 2d 1345 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • Winners Circle of Homes Inc. v. Barnette 681 So. 2d 42 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., (La.
  • Brehm v. Brehm 686 So. 2d 881 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
    In that case, this Court, relying on the reasoning in Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., and LSA-C.C.P.
  • Riley v. Riley 680 So. 2d 169 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    See Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South,Inc.
  • Miller v. Courier 679 So. 2d 942 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    See generally Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Sanders v. Gore 676 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
    In the recent case of Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., the Louisiana Supreme Court summarized the relevant jurisprudence with regard to the exception of no cause of action: The function of an exception of no cause of action is to test the legal sufficiency of the petition by determining whether the law affords a remedy on the facts alleged in the pleading.
  • Milano v. Board of Commissioners 676 So. 2d 195 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
    While the Supreme Court declined the invitation extended by the concurrence in Lawson to address this issue, which was noted but reserved for another day in Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., , 1241 n. 12 (La.1993), we would hope that it would now act to resolve this direct conflict between the circuits.
  • Cavin v. Harris Chevrolet, Inc. 673 So. 2d 654 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    Everything On Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Principal Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Progressive United Corp. 674 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • Ostheimer v. Venvirotek of Louisiana, Inc. 674 So. 2d 337 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • International River Center v. Henry C. Beck Co. 672 So. 2d 1160 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    the Supreme Court stated that a judgment partially granting an exception of no cause of action was an interlocutory judgment that was not appealable, in the absence of irreparable injury, because La.
  • MD Care, Inc. v. Angelo 672 So. 2d 969 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Walker v. Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets 671 So. 2d 983 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    Everything on Wheels Subaru v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Plauche v. Plauche 673 So. 2d 1053 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
    The leading case on the appealability of partial judgments is Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc.
  • Pittman v. Beebe 670 So. 2d 761 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
  • Nabors Drilling USA, Inc. v. NR Turnkey, Inc. 670 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    In my view, the defendant’s is misplaced.