Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Baker v. MacLay Properties Co., 648 So. 2d 888.

53 citing documents.

Henry L. Klein, the Succession of Frederick P. Heisler and Levy Gardens Partners 2007 Lp v. Lewis Title … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
1/17/95), (citations omitted).
Dr. James Stenhouse v. Louisiana Women's Healthcare Associates, L.L.C. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
Succession of Evlyn Northington Farris Angus La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
Succession of Robert Alfred Schimek, Sr.. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
Fluid Disposal Specialties, Inc. v. UniFirst Corporation La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
Matter Of Bcl Investments, L.L.C. 264 So. 3d 675 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
1/17/95), , is inapplicable to the facts at hand.
In re Coop. Endeavor Agreement Between 42nd Dist. Indigent Defender Office & 42nd Judicial District Office of Dist. … 255 So. 3d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
1/17/95), , the Supreme Court held that the fee-splitting provision in a contract between an out-of-state real estate broker and an in-state broker was absolutely null because it followed a statute that violated the Privileges and Immunities clause.
Mendoza v. Mendoza 249 So. 3d 67 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Taxicab Insurance Store, LLC v. American Service Insurance Co. 224 So. 3d 451 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Crescent City Cabinets & Flooring, L.L.C. v. Grace Tama Development Co. 203 So. 3d 408 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
1/17/95), ); see also Quilio & Associates, Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish Gov’t, 05-0803, p. 12 (La.App.
Chapital v. Harry Kelleher & Co. 144 So. 3d 75 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 3/6/02), (citing Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), )).
J-W Operating Co. v. Olsen 130 So. 3d 1017 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
art. 2030; Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
State Department of Children & Family Services ex rel. J.C. v. Charles 131 So. 3d 1054 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that there are five elements required for a showing of unjust enrichment: (1) there must be an enrichment; (2) there must be an impoverishment; (3) there must be a connection between the enrichment and resulting impoverishment; (4) there must be an absence of ‘justification’ o
Vagelos v. Abramson 126 So. 3d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 3/6/02), ; Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), .
St. Pierre v. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. 102 So. 3d 1003 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 3/6/02), (citing Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), ).
Gwen Gonsoulin v. Michelle Pontiff La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
1/17/95), -96: 3 LSA-C.C.
Gonsoulin v. Pontiff 74 So. 3d 809 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
The supreme court discussed cause in Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 14 (La.1/17/95), , 895-96: |,,LSA-C.C.
Dugas v. Thompson 71 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 3/6/02), (citing Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), ).
Michael R. Garber v. Badon & Ranier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Garber v. Badon & Ranier 981 So. 2d 92 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
MATRIX CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. v. Patel 973 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Fagot v. Parsons 958 So. 2d 750 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
In Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , the Louisiana Supreme Court enumerated the requirements that must be shown to prove a claim for unjust enrichment.
II Fire Records, L.L.C. v. Clouden 951 So. 2d 1272 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
In Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , the Louisiana Supreme Court enumerated the requirements that must be shown to prove a claim for unjust enrichment.
Jackson v. CAPITOL CITY FAMILY HEALTH CENT. 928 So. 2d 129 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
Gulfstream Services v. Hot Energy Services 907 So. 2d 96 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
art. 854; Baker v. Maclay Properties Company, 94-1529, pp. 16-18 (La.1/17/95), -97 .
Laborde v. Dastugue 868 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
Unjust Enrichment In Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , the Louisiana Supreme Court listed as follows the requirements for a finding of unjust enrichment: The five requirements for a showing of unjust enrichment, or actio de in rem verso, are: (1) there must be an enrichment, *235 (2) there must be an impoverishment, (3) there must be a connection between the enrichment
St. Romain v. STATE, THROUGH DWF 863 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Because Louisiana is a fact pleading jurisdiction, see Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), , St.
Smith v. TERREBONNE PARISH CONSOL. GOV'T. 858 So. 2d 671 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
Lambert v. Bank One Trust, NA 845 So. 2d 1157 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
In Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the following factors necessary to establish unjust enrichment: 1) there must be an enrichment; 2) there must be an impoverishment; 3) there must be a connection between the enrichment and resulting impoverishment; 4) there must be an absence of “justification” or “cause” f
STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV. v. Todd 834 So. 2d 1114 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
Miller v. Loyola University of New Orleans 829 So. 2d 1057 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
BAMBURG STEEL BLDS., INC. v. Lawrence Gen. Corp. 817 So. 2d 427 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
Tandy, supra ; Caldwell, supra ; Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), ; Edmonston v. A-Second Mortg.
JCD Marketing Co. v. Bass Hotels and Resorts, Inc. 812 So. 2d 834 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), .
McDonald v. Barker Auto Sales, Inc. 810 So. 2d 1242 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
1 Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), ; Tandy v. Pecan Shoppe of Minden Inc., 34,578 (La.App.
Davis v. Town of St. Gabriel 809 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
ACMG of Louisiana, Inc. v. Jones 796 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
Dumas, 742 So.2d at 661 , citing, Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.01/17/95), .
Tandy v. Pecan Shoppe of Minden, Inc. 785 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
Caldwell Wholesale Co., Inc, supra; Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.01/17/95), ; Edmonston v. A Second Mortg.
Finova Capital Corp. v. IT Corp. 774 So. 2d 1129 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
Pique Severn Avenue Partnership v. Ballen 773 So. 2d 179 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
" WE THE PEOPLE" PARALEGAL SERV. v. Watley 766 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Second, the Louisiana Supreme Court in Baker v. Maclay Properties, Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , recognized that even where a contract is a nullity, recovery may be had under the theory of unjust enrichment.
Caldwell Wholesale Co. v. Central Oil & Supply Corp. 761 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), ; Edmonston v. A-Second Mortgage Co. of Slidell, Inc., Minyard v. Curtis Products, Inc., 251 La.
Haring v. Stinson 756 So. 2d 1201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
In Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.01/17/95), , the Louisiana Supreme Court reiterated the five requirements for a showing of unjust enrichment: (1) there must be an enrichment; (2) there must be an impoverishment; (3) there must be a connection between the enrichment and resulting impoverishment; (4) there must be an absence of "justification" or "cause" for the
United Enterprises Corp. v. Dixon Mortgage Group, Inc. 762 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
In support of its argument that the trial court misapplied that doctrine, Dixon cites the Louisiana Supreme |7Court’s opinion in Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , which involved a trial court judgment granting a motion for summary *47 judgment and dismissing an in-state broker’s claim for a portion of a brokerage fee.
Dumas v. Angus Chemical Co. 742 So. 2d 655 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .
Dumas and Associates, Inc. v. Lewis Enterprises Inc. 704 So. 2d 433 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Defendants argue that Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), , (La.
Carriere v. Bank of Louisiana 702 So. 2d 648 La. 1997
See, e.g., Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529, p. 18 (La.1/17/95), , and cases cited therein.
Michael v. City of Minden 704 So. 2d 409 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Cooley v. Benson Motor Co. of New Orleans 695 So. 2d 1049 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95) .
Galan v. Covenant House New Orleans 695 So. 2d 1007 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
“Only when reasonable minds must inevitably conclude that 14the mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the facts before the court is a summary judgment warranted.” Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), ; Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd., 93-1480 (La.4/11/94), .
Baldwin v. Bass 685 So. 2d 436 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
1927, 1947; Baker v. Maclay Properties Co., 94-1529 (La.1/17/95), .