Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Theriot v. Allstate Ins. Co., 625 So. 2d 1337.

234 citing documents.

Boxie v. Smith-Ruffin 979 So. 2d 539 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
Schindler v. Harrah's Las Vegas, Inc. 976 So. 2d 774 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
Miller v. Lammico 973 So. 2d 693 La. 2008
Co., (the fact finder's discretion in awarding general damages is vast and should rarely be disturbed); Reck v. Stevens.
Venissat v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. 968 So. 2d 1063 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Co., (citing Coco v. Winston Indus., Inc., ).
Terrance v. Dow Chemical Co. 971 So. 2d 1058 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Co., , *1071 1340 (La.1993).
Theodore Venissat v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Co., (citing Coco v. Winston Indus., Inc., ).
Kalil v. HCA Health Services of Louisiana 963 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc.
Nguyen v. Grafton 962 So. 2d 488 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
Cascio v. Downing 957 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
Oden v. Gales 960 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Webster v. Ballard 961 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Lino v. Allstate Insurance Co. 937 So. 2d 888 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Williams v. Roberts 930 So. 2d 121 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
Raines v. Columbia Lakeland Medical Center 923 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Hanks v. Seale 904 So. 2d 662 La. 2005
LeBlanc v. Baxter 905 So. 2d 415 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
Burgard v. Allstate Ins. Co. 904 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
Poche v. Allstate Ins. Co. 900 So. 2d 55 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
Noran J. Robin, Jr., Et Ux. v. Allstate Indemnity Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
(alteration in original), the supreme court restated the law concerning appellate review of damage awards as follows: Our jurisprudence has consistently held that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such award
Robin v. Allstate Indemnity Co. 889 So. 2d 450 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
(alteration in original), the supreme court restated the law concerning appellate review of damage awards as follows: Our jurisprudence has consistently held that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such awards will be disturbed only whe
Cole v. STATE, DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETY 886 So. 2d 463 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Baudier v. Cheron 876 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
Scarbrough v. OK Guard Dogs 879 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Roberts v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. 878 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Simmons v. CTL DISTRIBUTION 868 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
Turner v. Lyons 867 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
Bergeron v. Albert 861 So. 2d 269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Caruso v. Canal Indem. Co. 858 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Dorvilier v. Gagliano 855 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
Matthews v. Ferrer, 95-0266 (La.App.
Johnson v. Lanoix 847 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Co., the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: Our jurisprudence has consistently held that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such awards will be disturbed only when there has been a clear abuse of that discretion.
Tauzier v. Kraus 845 So. 2d 1208 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Co., the Louisiana Supreme Court said: Our jurisprudence has consistently held that in the assessment of damages, much discretion is left to the judge or jury, and upon appellate review such awards will be disturbed only when there has been a clear abuse of that discretion.
Farrell v. Pierre 846 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Sacco v. Allred 845 So. 2d 528 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Millet v. Evangeline Health Care, Inc. 839 So. 2d 357 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Klooster v. Hartford Insurance Co. of Midwest 829 So. 2d 1131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Co.; Matta v. Snow, 01-760 (La.App 5 Cir. 1/15/02), .
Updegraff v. STATE EX REL. DOTD 828 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Updegraff v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 828 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Lanasa v. Harrison 828 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Hebert v. ANCO Insulation, Inc. 835 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Matta v. Snow 807 So. 2d 934 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
Kennedy v. Allstate Insurance Co. 807 So. 2d 946 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Gunn v. Robertson 801 So. 2d 555 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
Emery v. Owens-Corporation 813 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Herzog v. Fabacher 800 So. 2d 997 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Co., and Bostwick v. M.A.P.P.
Leblanc v. Louque 798 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Thoulion v. Jeanfreau 794 So. 2d 936 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Johnson v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport 792 So. 2d 33 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
Abadie v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 804 So. 2d 11 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
Thom v. Benson Chevrolet Co., Inc., 99-1150 (La.App.
Schiro v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEVELOPMENT 808 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
Schiro v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 808 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001