Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Yount v. Maisano, 627 So. 2d 148.

117 citing documents.

Billy Ray Hodge v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, XYZ Insurance Company, Nicolas Hopkins La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London as Subrogee of L.G.O. Properties, LLC v. Duxworth Roofing and Sheetmetal, Inc. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
Choice Foundation v. Law Industries, LLC La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
“Generally the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims” because “[t]he insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiff’s petition, with the insurer being obligated to furnish a defense unless the petition unambiguously excludes coverage.” (La.
Coastal Chemical Company, LLC v. The Travelers Indemnity Company and Lexington Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
Brandon S. Wise Indv. and Obo Drey Domone Wise v. George O'Neil and Antoinette O'Neil La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
Rain Cii Carbon, LLC v. Turner Industries Group, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
“[p]olicies 1 should be construed to effect, not deny, coverage[,]” and “any ambiguity in an exclusion should be narrowly construed in favor of coverage.” As also stated by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd., 93-1480 (La.
Mann v. Tim Clark Constr., LLC 273 So. 3d 397 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
Yount v. Maisano , , 151 (La.
Ellis v. McDonald 265 So. 3d 982 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
Yount v. Maisano , , 152 (La.
ASI Fed. Credit Union v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London Syndicate 1414 Subscribing to Policy FINFR1503374 259 So. 3d 552 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Keeping in mind the principle that insurance policies should be interpreted to effect, not deny, coverage ( Yount v. Maisano , , 151 (La.
Crosstex Energy Servs., LP v. Tex. Brine Co. 238 So. 3d 963 La. 2018
In particular, I would investigate whether the allegations in the petition, when liberally interpreted, see Yount v. Maisano , (La.
Crosstex Energy Servs., LP v. Tex. Brine Co. 238 So. 3d 962 La. 2018
In particular, I would investigate whether the allegations in the petition, when liberally interpreted, see Yount v. Maisano , (La.
Gibbs Constr., L.L.C. v. Nat'l Rice Mill, L.L.C. 238 So. 3d 1033 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Yount v. Maisano , , 151 (La.
Dorsey v. Purvis Contracting Grp., LLC 236 So. 3d 737 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2017
Yount v. Maisano , , 151 (La.
Lydia Degueyter v. First American Title Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
Degueyter v. First American Title Co. 230 So. 3d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Davis v. Nola Home Construction, L.L.C. 222 So. 3d 833 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Supreme Servs., 06-1827 at p. 6, 958 So.2d at 638 ( (La.
Duvio v. Specialty Pools Co. 216 So. 3d 999 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Haygood v. Dies 174 So. 3d 1211 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
Explained Kacie Renee Spears v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Referencing jurisprudence addressing an insurer’s duty to defend, the supreme court has stated: “the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims.” “The insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiff’s petition, with the insurer being obligated
Explained Spears v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. 160 So. 3d 631 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Referencing jurisprudence addressing an insurer’s duty to defend, the supreme court has stated: “the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for *635 damage claims.” “The insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiffs petition, with the insurer being obligated to furnish a defense
Explained Rhonda B. Hickey v. Allstate Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
7/1/11), the supreme court once again addressed the issue of an insurer’s duty to defend its insured: “the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims.” “The insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiffs petition, with the insurer being obligated t
Explained Hickey v. Allstate Ins. Co. 159 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Duty to Defend In Arceneaux v. Amstar Corp., 10-2329, p. 9 (La.7/1/11), , the supreme court once again addressed the issue of an insurer’s duty to defend its insured: “the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims.” “The insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiffs petition, with the insurer being obligated to furnish a defense unle
Arceneaux v. Amstar Corp. 161 So. 3d 115 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Wayne Guillot, Et Ux. v. Reece Guillot, Et Ux. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Addressing the issue of the exclusion of insurance coverage for intentional torts, (La.
Valencia v. A & J Auto Wreckers, Inc. 119 So. 3d 936 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Although the purpose of liability insurance is to afford the insured protection from damage claims and, therefore, insurance contracts should be interpreted to effect, not deny, coverage, when the words of an insurance contract are clear and *940 explicit and lead to no absurd consequences, no further interpretation may be made in search of the parties’ intent.
Love v. Sirey 119 So. 3d 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
George S. May International Co. v. Arrowpoint Capital Corp. 97 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2012
Rider v. Ambeau 100 So. 3d 849 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Bernard v. Ellis 76 So. 3d 69 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
Explained Hayes v. Rotolo 77 So. 3d 76 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Our supreme court recently addressed the insurer’s duty to defend in Arceneaux v. Amstar Corp., 10-2329, p. 9 (La.7/1/11), : “the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims.” “The insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiffs petition, with the insurer being obligated to furnish a defense unle
Explained Arceneaux v. Amstar Corp. 66 So. 3d 438 La. 2011
“the insurer’s obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims.” “The insurer’s duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the injured plaintiffs petition, with the insurer being obligated to furnish a defense unle
Anderson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. 42 So. 3d 1140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Arceneaux v. Amstar Corp. 101 So. 3d 951 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Matheny v. Ludwig, 32,288 (La.App.
Baggett v. Tassin 39 So. 3d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Brewster v. Hunter 38 So. 3d 912 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Graphia v. Schmitt 7 So. 3d 716 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Beck v. BURGUENO 996 So. 2d 404 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Tsilimos v. GULF MARINE AND INDUS. SUPPLIES 976 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
Tara Bruckbauer v. State of Louisiana La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
BRUCKBAUER v. State 970 So. 2d 113 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Stewart Contractors v. Metalpro Indus. 969 So. 2d 653 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
Henly v. Phillips Abita Lumber Co. 971 So. 2d 1104 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Supreme Services v. Sonny Greer, Inc. 958 So. 2d 634 La. 2007
Feierabend v. Starns 961 So. 2d 1196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
the supreme court confronted the same language as the Shelter exclusion for bodily injury “ ‘expected or intended by the insured.’ ” The Yount court had to determine whether the language excluded coverage for an insured who had repeatedly hit and kicked the victim in the face causing severe injuries.
Johnson v. Misirci 955 So. 2d 715 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
Matheny v. Ludwig, 32,288 (La.App.
Sauviac v. Dobbins 949 So. 2d 513 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Rolston v. United Services Automobile Ass'n 948 So. 2d 1113 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
Rolston v. UNITED SERVICES AUTO. ASS'N. 948 So. 2d 1113 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Guidry v. Lee Consulting Engineering, Inc. 945 So. 2d 785 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
Grimaldi Mechanical v. the Gray Ins. Co. 933 So. 2d 887 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Matheny v. Ludwig, 32,288 (La.App.