Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 623 So. 2d 1257.

1628 citing documents.

Alexander v. Ford 866 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
Moore v. Kenilworth/Kailas Properties 865 So. 2d 884 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
O'CONNOR v. Litchfield 864 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Justin Douglas Henderson v. Brian Sellers La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp.
Henderson v. Sellers 861 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Opel P. Teasley v. Charles K. Ates La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Johnson v. City of Winnfield 862 So. 2d 433 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Morace v. Melvyn's Restaurant Inc., 30,988 (La.App.
Teasley v. Ates 861 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Thonn v. Cook 863 So. 2d 628 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
Mindful that in quantum determinations, cert.
Sepulvado v. Turner 862 So. 2d 457 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Jones v. Phillips 861 So. 2d 618 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Professional Divers of New Orleans, Inc. v. William G. Helis Co. 861 So. 2d 245 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., et al, p. 4 (La.1993), .
American Cent. Ins. Co. v. Terex Crane 861 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
certiorari denied, 510 U.S. 1114 , 114 S.Ct.
Jake Dixon, Et Ux. v. Daniel Butane Gas Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
His own undisputed account, as well as Judy and Mamie Dixon’s 1 cert.
Dixon v. Daniel Butane Gas Inc. 858 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Explained Miller v. Clout 857 So. 2d 458 La. 2003
we explained that an appellate court should rarely disturb a general damage award: [T]he discretion vested in the trier of fact is "great," and even vast, so that an appellate court should rarely disturb an award of general damages.
Earl Lee Scott and Felicia A. Scott v. James Ray Roberts and State of La, Thru the Dotd La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Scott v. Roberts 856 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Hall v. Folger Coffee Co. 857 So. 2d 1234 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
Cone v. National Emergency Services, Inc., 99-0934, p. 8 (La.10/29/99), ().
Hays v. State 856 So. 2d 64 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Caruso v. Canal Indem. Co. 858 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Sweeney v. Geico Indemnity Co. 855 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Dorvilier v. Gagliano 855 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
Hubbard v. State 852 So. 2d 1097 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
See generally, -61 (La.1993).
Darby v. Brookshire Grocery Co. 851 So. 2d 358 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Estate of Hickerson v. Zimmerman 853 So. 2d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
David v. Our Lady of Lake Hosp., Inc. 857 So. 2d 529 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
cert denied, 510 U.S. 1114 , 114 S.Ct.
Robinson v. North American Salt Co. 865 So. 2d 98 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Temple v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 858 So. 2d 569 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Booth v. Madison River Communications 851 So. 2d 1185 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Alcorn v. City of Baton Rouge 851 So. 2d 1194 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 9/27/02), , writ denied, 02-2940 (La.2/7/03), , cert.
Temple v. STATE EX REL. DOTD 858 So. 2d 569 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Corbello v. Iowa Production 850 So. 2d 686 La. 2003
Green v. K-Mart Corp. 849 So. 2d 814 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
cert denied, 510 U.S. 1114 , 114 S.Ct.
Broyard v. Rainer 850 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Cox v. Julian 846 So. 2d 986 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
the Supreme Court upheld the longstanding rule that an appellate court is not to decide what it considers an appropriate award, but rather to review the exercise of discretion by the trier of fact, considering the particular injuries and their effects on the particular circumstances of the particular plaint
Lebato v. Safeway Insurance Co. 852 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
In affirming these awards,- : The standard for appellate review of general damage awards is difficult to express and is necessarily non-specific, and the requirement of an articulated basis for disturbing such awards gives little guidance as to what articulation suffices to justify modification of a generous or stingy award.
Johnson v. Lanoix 847 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
the majority opinion contains the following commentary of the interpretation and application of the controlling legal precepts: The standard for appellate review of general damage awards is difficult to express and is necessarily non-specific, and the requirement of an articulated basis for disturbing
Davenport v. A & H Services Co. 848 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Landry v. Leonard J. Chabert Med. Ctr. 858 So. 2d 454 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Bodenheimer v. New Orleans Public Belt 845 So. 2d 1279 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
3 Cir. 3/24/99) , , which quoted the following standard from Louisiana Supreme Court’s : The initial inquiry is whether the award for the particular injuries and their effects under the particular circumstances on the particular injured person is a clear abuse of the “much discretion” of the trier of fact.
Domingue Ex Rel. Domingue v. Allied 849 So. 2d 690 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Held v. Aubert 845 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Wakefield v. Reliance Nat. Indemn. Co. 845 So. 2d 1238 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Tauzier v. Kraus 845 So. 2d 1208 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
This court recently considered the standard of appellate review of general damages awards in Hae Woo Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., et al, ...
Williams v. Housing Authority of New Orleans 844 So. 2d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Millet v. Schmidt 844 So. 2d 1072 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Civil Code art. 2324.1 provides that “[i]n the assessment of damages in cases of offenses, quasi offenses, and quasi contracts, much discretion must be left to' the judge or jury.” The standard for appellate court review of a trial court’s
Flint v. Trolley Stop 843 So. 2d 635 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Lee v. Farmers Insurance Exchange 842 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
RThe standard for an appellate court’s and was confirmed in Youn v. Maritime Overseas, Corp., cert.
Oliver v. Cal Dive Intern., Inc. 844 So. 2d 942 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
cert denied, 510 U.S. 1114 , 114 S.Ct.