Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Piazza, 596 So. 2d 817.

84 citing documents.

State v. Brown 849 So. 2d 566 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Palmer v. BESE 842 So. 2d 363 La. 2003
SWAT 24 Shreveport Bossier, Inc. v. Bond, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/29/01), Citing Stogner v. Stogner, 98-3044, p. 5 (La.7/7/99)
State v. Ventress 817 So. 2d 377 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
State v. Williams 800 So. 2d 790 La. 2001
SWAT 24 Shreveport Bossier, Inc. v. Bond 808 So. 2d 294 La. 2001
Stogner v. Stogner, 98-3044, p. 5 (La.7/7/99)
Dalme v. Blockers Manufactured Homes, Inc. 779 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
Bebop's Ice House, Inc. v. City of Sulphur 774 So. 2d 369 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
1993); State v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana, 188 La.
State v. Palermo 765 So. 2d 1155 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
-820 (La.1992), the court considered a conflict in the penalty portion of a statute, and held that when two or more interpretations of the penalties are possible, lenity directs the court to impose the least severe penalty.
State v. Palermo 765 So. 2d 1139 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
-820 (La.1992), the court considered a conflict in the penalty portion of a statute, and *1151 held that when two or more interpretations of the penalties are possible, lenity directs the court to impose the least severe penalty.
State v. Carr 761 So. 2d 1271 La. 2000
Bossier, 95-2075, p. 6 (La.7/2/96), ().
State v. Joshlin 752 So. 2d 834 La. 2000
See State v. Becnel, 93-2536 (La.5/31/96), ; (La.
In Re Succession of Boyter 756 So. 2d 1122 La. 2000
Stogner v. Stogner, 98-3044 (La.7/7/99), ; (La.
Killeen v. Jenkins 752 So. 2d 146 La. 1999
see also 1 M. Planiol, TRAITE ELEMENTAIRE DE DROIT CIVIL, No. 228 (12th ed.1939), reprinted in TREATISE ON THE CIVIL LAW at 165 (La.St.
Stogner v. Stogner 739 So. 2d 762 La. 1999
State v. Antoine 721 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Longnon 720 So. 2d 825 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Ingram 738 So. 2d 20 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
State v. Farris, 95 0570 (La.App.
Ruiz v. Oniate 713 So. 2d 442 La. 1998
Jordan v. Louisiana Gaming Control Bd. 712 So. 2d 74 La. 1998
Co., State v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana, 188 La.
Eicher v. LA. STATE POLICE, RIVERBOAT GAMING ENFOR. DIV. 710 So. 2d 799 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State on Behalf of Jones v. Mallet 704 So. 2d 958 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Downs v. J. & J. MAINTENANCE, INC. 702 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Hebard v. Dillon 699 So. 2d 497 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
State v. Amato 698 So. 2d 972 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
2190, 2197 , 60 L.Ed.2d 743 (1979)
Theriot v. Midland Risk Ins. Co. 694 So. 2d 184 La. 1997
Haspel & Davis v. Bd. of Levee Com'rs 680 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
reh'g granted in part, 91-2256 (La.4/30/92).
Vogt v. Board of Levee Com'rs 680 So. 2d 149 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
reh'g granted in part, 91-2256 (La.4/30/92).
Chevalier v. LH Bossier, Inc. 676 So. 2d 1072 La. 1996
("The rule of lenity applies not only to interpretations of the substantive ambit of criminal laws, but also to the penalties imposed by those laws.").
State v. Crawford 672 So. 2d 197 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
the court explained: *208 Legislative intent is the fundamental question in all cases of statutory interpretation, and rules of statutory construction are designed to ascertain and enforce the intent of the statute.
State v. Farris 666 So. 2d 337 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
First Nat. Bank v. Beckwith MacHinery Co. 650 So. 2d 1148 La. 1995
Roby v. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT SYS. OF NEW ORLEANS 650 So. 2d 811 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
Bourque v. Bailey 643 So. 2d 236 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
A. Copeland Enterprises Inc. v. Slide Memorial Hospital 637 So. 2d 1087 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994