DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 646 So. 2d 859.

253 citing documents.

  • Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic 51 So. 3d 874 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    [Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/20/94), ] at 864.
  • Estate of Sedonia William v. Delores Benoit AKA Delores Benoit Hippolite La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94)
  • Explained MARCILE v. Dauzat 44 So. 3d 678 La. 2010
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/20/94), , we explained the unconstitutionality of a statute must be specially pleaded in the district court: Our Code of Civil Procedure does not require a single procedure or type of proceeding for challenging or assailing the constitutionality of a statute.
  • Clark Gunderson, M.D. v. F. A. Richard & Associates, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94)
  • Scott v. American Tobacco Co., Inc. 36 So. 3d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    See Mosing v. Domas, 02-0012 (La.10/15/02), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Rapides Parish Police Jury v. Catahoula Duck Club & Lodge La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Rapides Parish Police Jury v. Catahoula Duck Club & Lodge L.L.C. 24 So. 3d 988 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Marino v. Parish of St. Charles 27 So. 3d 926 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2009
    1/19/05), (citing Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), ).
  • Johnson v. Shafor 22 So. 3d 935 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    See Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238, pp. 8-9 (La.11/30/94), -65 .
  • Council of City of New Orleans v. Washington 9 So. 3d 854 La. 2009
    Mosing v. Domas, 02-0012 (La.10/15/02), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Miller v. Crescent City Health Care Center 24 So. 3d 891 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
    5 Cir. 11/25/97), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238, pp. 7-8 (La.11/30/94), -65 ; Smith v. Willard, 97-1772, p. 5 (La.App.
  • Miller v. Crescent City Health Care Center 24 So. 3d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    5 Cir. 11/25/97), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238, pp. 7-8 (La.11/30/94), -65 ; Smith v. Willard, 97-1772, p. 5 (La.App.
  • Pierre v. Louisiana S.W. Transportation, Inc. 14 So. 3d 593 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2009
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Willows v. State, Department of Health & Hospitals 15 So. 3d 56 La. 2009
    “It is well-settled that a constitutional challenge may not be considered by an appellate court unless it was properly pleaded and raised in the trial court below.” Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., 94-1238, (La.11/30/94), -65 .
  • CITY OF DENHAM SPRINGS v. Perkins 10 So. 3d 311 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), -865 .
  • Glenn M. Hebert v. Louisiana Licensed Professional Voc. Rehab. Counselors La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    See Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), (stating the longstanding jurisprudential rule of law in Louisiana that litigants must raise constitutional attacks in the district court, not the appellate courts, and the constitutional challenge must be specially pleaded and the grounds for the claim particularized).
  • Hebert v. Louisiana Licensed Professional Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors 4 So. 3d 1002 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    See Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), (stating the longstanding jurisprudential rule of law in Louisiana that litigants must raise constitutional attacks in the district court, not the appellate courts, and the constitutional challenge must be specially pleaded and the grounds for the claim particularized).
  • France v. EAST CENT. BOSSIER FIRE PROTECT. 4 So. 3d 959 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
  • France v. East Central Bossier Fire Protection District No. 1 4 So. 3d 959 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
  • Rochon v. Young 6 So. 3d 890 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Explained Rogoz v. Tangipahoa Parish Council 21 So. 3d 923 La. 2009
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 9 (La.11/30/94), , we explained that the purpose of this requirement was to allow the parties to brief and argue the issue at a contradictory hearing in order to make a full record for this court’s review: The requirement of specially pleading the unconstitutionality of a statute in pleadings implies that this notable issue will
  • State v. Burnes 997 So. 2d 906 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    State v. Schoening, 00-0903, p. 3 (La.10/17/00), (citing Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/30/94), -65 ).
  • MJ Farms, Ltd. v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 998 So. 2d 16 La. 2008
    Farms failed to raise the issue of constitutionality through a proper pleading as required by Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Williams v. Fahrenholtz 990 So. 2d 99 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State Ex Rel. Sm 992 So. 2d 1085 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State ex rel. S.M. 992 So. 2d 1085 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Hatton 985 So. 2d 709 La. 2008
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/30/94), -65 .
  • State v. Granger 982 So. 2d 779 La. 2008
    11/30/94), -65 (footnote omitted).
  • Burmaster v. Plaquemines Parish Government 982 So. 2d 795 La. 2008
    1/25/08), , quoting Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/20/94), -65 .
  • Hebert v. LOUISIANA PROF. REHAB. COUNSELORS 981 So. 2d 21 La. 2008
    See Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), (stating the longstanding jurisprudential rule of law in Louisiana that litigants must raise constitutional attacks in the district court, not the appellate courts, and the constitutional challenge must be specially pleaded and the grounds for the claim particularized).
  • Hebert v. Louisiana Licensed Professional Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors 981 So. 2d 21 La. 2008
    See Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), (stating the longstanding jurisprudential rule of law in Louisiana that litigants must raise constitutional attacks in the district court, not the appellate courts, and the constitutional challenge must be specially pleaded and the grounds for the claim particularized).
  • In Re Medical Review Panel Proc. of Ouder 991 So. 2d 58 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State of Louisiana v. Clinton B. Schneider, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Reeder v. North, 97-0239, p. 14 (La.10/21/97), Williams v. State, Dept. of Health & Hospitals, 95-0713, p. 4 (La.1/26/96), Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/30/94), -65.
  • State v. Schneider 981 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Reeder v. North, 97-0239, p. 14 (La.10/21/97), ; Williams v. State, Dept. of Health & Hospitals, 95-0713, p. 4 (La.1/26/96), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/30/94), -65 .
  • Explained Meaux v. Galtier 972 So. 2d 1137 La. 2008
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/20/94), , we explained the requirements for pleading the unconstitutionality of a statute in the district court: *1138 Our Code of Civil Procedure does not require a single procedure or type of proceeding for challenging or assailing the constitutionality of a statute.
  • Baldini v. East Jefferson General Hosp. 976 So. 2d 746 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Deculus v. Welborn 964 So. 2d 930 La. 2007
    Istre v. Meche, XXXX-XXXX (La.10/17/00), ; Reeder v. North, 97-0239, (La.10/21/97), ; Williams v. State, Dept. of Health & Hospitals, 95-0713, (La.1/26/96), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Moon Ventures, LLC v. Kpmg, LLP La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
  • Moon Ventures, LLC v. KPMG, LLP 964 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    3 Cir. 3/3/04) , , writ denied, 04-1419 (La.9/24/04), ; Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • Charles Ray Taylor, Jr. v. Richard J. Clement, M.D., Lpcf La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
  • Susan Arrington, Etc. v. Er Physicians Group, Apmc La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    11/20/94), : Our Code of Civil Procedure does not require a single procedure or type of proceeding for challenging or assailing the constitutionality of a statute.
  • Taylor v. Clement 970 So. 2d 545 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    In the case before us, the unconstitutionality of the cap on general damages was raised in a pleading in the trial court, as required by the supreme court's decision in Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/20/94), .
  • Arrington v. Galen-Med, Inc. 970 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    The supreme court, holding the unconstitutionality of a statute must be specially pleaded in the district court, stated in Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/20/94), : Our Code of Civil Procedure does not require a single procedure or type of proceeding for challenging or assailing the constitutionality of a statute.
  • MJ Farms, Ltd. v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 956 So. 2d 573 La. 2007
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238 (La.11/20/94), , this court explained that the unconstitutionality of a statute must be specially pleaded in the district court: Our Code of Civil Procedure does not require a single procedure or type of proceeding for challenging or assailing the constitutionality of a statute.
  • HISTORIC RESTORATION v. RSUI Indem. Co. 955 So. 2d 200 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., 94-1238 (La.11/30/94), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Clayton James Greene La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    v. Connick, 94-3161, p. 6 (La.3/9/95), Vallo v. Gayle Oil Co., Inc., 94-1238, p. 8 (La.11/30/94), -65; Lemire v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc.
  • Explained Taylor v. Clement 947 So. 2d 721 La. 2007
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 9 (La.11/30/94), , we explained that the purpose of this requirement was to allow the parties to brief and argue the issue at a contradictory hearing in order to make a full record for this court's review: The requirement of specially pleading the unconstitutionality of a statute in pleadings implies that this notable issue will
  • Explained Arrington v. Galen-Med, Inc. 947 So. 2d 719 La. 2007
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 9 (La.11/30/94), , we explained that the purpose of this requirement was to allow the parties to brief and argue the issue at a contradictory hearing in order to make a full record for this court's review: The requirement of specially pleading the unconstitutionality of a statute in pleadings implies that this notable issue *721
  • Explained Taylor v. Clement 947 So. 2d 732 La. 2007
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 9 (La.11/30/94), , we explained that the purpose of this requirement was to allow the parties to brief and argue the issue at a contradictory hearing in order to make a full record for this court’s review: The requirement of specially pleading the unconstitutionality of a statute in pleadings implies that Rthis notable issue will
  • Explained Arrington v. Galen-Med, Inc. 947 So. 2d 727 La. 2007
    In Vallo v. Gayle Oil Company, Inc., 94-1238, p. 9 (La.11/30/94), , we explained that the purpose of this requirement was to allow the parties to brief and argue the issue at a contradictory hearing in order to make a full record for this court's review: The requirement of specially pleading the unconstitutionality of a statute in pleadings implies that this notable issue will