Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Oliver v. Oliver, 671 So. 2d 1081.

31 citing documents.

Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College v. Allen Bickham La. 2024
App. 3 Cir. 3/27/96), (the “joint motion to continue, which resulted in the indefinite continuation of the hearing on her motion.
Donald E. Wagoner v. Krisann J. Munoz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
Susana F. Moody v. Ross Moody La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
Mrs. Salvatore Paul Provenza, Sr., Salvatore Paul Provenza, Jr., Victoria C. Provenza, and the Unopened Succession of Salvatore … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2021
Taylor v. Dash Equip. & Supplies, Inc. 258 So. 3d 909 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
3 Cir. 3/27/96) , (whereby this court found that an unopposed motion to continue without a trial date is not a step in the prosecution.)
Brooks Taylor v. Dash Equipment & Supplies, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
3 Cir. 3/27/96), (whereby this court found that an unopposed motion to continue without a trial date is not a step in the prosecution.)
Mable Dowden, Et Ux. v. Cassie Catts La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
Joshua Amos v. Shawana Semien La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
Quinton D. Steele v. Jasmine S. Ashworth La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Steele v. Ashworth 151 So. 3d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Laney Ray Barlow, Jr. v. Sandra Guillot Barlow La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Barlow v. Barlow 149 So. 3d 856 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Hutchison v. Seariver Maritime, Inc. 22 So. 3d 989 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
3rd Cir.3/27/96), ; c.f. Reed v. Finklestein, 2001-1015, p. 6 (La.App.
State in the Interest of Lw, Jw & Lw La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
3 Cir. 3/27/96), ( (La.App.
State Ex Rel. Lw 11 So. 3d 1225 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
3 Cir. 3/27/96), ( (La.App.
State ex rel. of L.W. 11 So. 3d 1225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
3 Cir. 3/27/96), ( (La.App.
Brown v. Kidney & Hypertension Associates, L.L.P. 5 So. 3d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
C.J.M. v. C.L. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
C.J.M. v. C.L. 987 So. 2d 317 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Cjm v. Cl 987 So. 2d 317 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Darla Hutchinson v. Philip Reed La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Robert Lee Laurence, III v. Sarah Ruth (Self) Laurence La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Laurence v. Laurence 957 So. 2d 931 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Aucoin v. Aucoin 834 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Francois v. Leon 834 So. 2d 1109 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
3 Cir. 3/27/96); , this court stated: "A considered decree is one which results from the reception by the court of evidence concerning parental fitness to exercise custody."
Bergeron v. Clark 832 So. 2d 327 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Weaver v. Weaver 824 So. 2d 438 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Lincecum v. Lincecum 812 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Reed v. Finklestein 807 So. 2d 1032 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
3 Cir. 3/27/96) , , Finklestein contends that a motion to continue a hearing is not a step in the prosecution or defense of a case.
In Re Succession of Chauffepied 775 So. 2d 555 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
Griffin v. Campbell 772 So. 2d 370 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
3 Cir. 3/27/96) , , we held that a motion to continue will not be considered a step in the prosecution because such a motion is not intended to hasten the matter to judgment.