DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Clement v. Frey, 666 So. 2d 607.

412 citing documents.

  • Gregor v. Argenot Great Cent. Ins. Co. 851 So. 2d 959 La. 2003
    See Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Ward Chevrolet Olds, Inc. v. State Farm Automobile Casualty Insurance Co. 843 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 c/w 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Flint v. Trolley Stop 843 So. 2d 635 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    See also Clement v. Frey, 96-1119, 95-1163 pp. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), -611 .
  • Williams v. City of Baton Rouge 844 So. 2d 360 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Hutchins v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. 844 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Joseph v. City of New Orleans 842 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    Maldonado , 95-2490 at p. 10, 687 So.2d at 1093 (citing Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, pp. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), -11 ).
  • Cleland v. City of Lake Charles 840 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    In reviewing allocation of fault, the Louisiana Supreme Court in Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, p. 7 (La.1/16/96); -11 , explained, "there is an analogy between excessive or inadequate quantum determinations and excessive or inadequate fault percentage determinations.
  • Jones v. City of New Orleans 840 So. 2d 620 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Although fault was allocated to the City in Howard, that allocation was sustained by this Court, citing Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, p. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), -611 , based on the manifest error standard of review and the broad discretion of the trial court in the allocation of fault which this Court analogized to quantum ^determinations.
  • Caffery v. White 846 So. 2d 771 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Duzon v. Stallworth 866 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, pp. 5-6 (La.1/16/96), 610 .
  • Bassett v. Toys" R" US Delaware, Inc. 836 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Duncan, supra; Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.01/16/96), ; Harrison v. Richardson, 35,512 (La.App.2d Cir.01/23/02), .
  • Simmons v. King 833 So. 2d 1148 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Hebert v. Brown Bottling Group, 98-0924 (La.10/30/98), ; Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.01/16/96), .
  • Taylor v. Clement 832 So. 2d 1089 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    and Development, and Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Madison v. ERNEST N. MORIAL CONVENT. CENTER 834 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    1/16/96), , the Supreme court rejected the de novo standard of review employed by the appellate court in Cornish in apportioning fault, but for reasons unrelated to the inconsistent results arising out of the bifurcated trial.
  • Hall v. Brookshire Bros., Ltd. 831 So. 2d 1010 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Davis v. Witt 831 So. 2d 1075 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    and Dev., Rosell ; and, Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); and find no manifest error in the trial court's conclusion that the Sheriff's Office was twenty percent at fault for the accident that caused the deaths of Mary and Clement.
  • Warren v. Sabine Towing and Transp. Co. 831 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163, pp. 7-8, (La.1/16/96), .
  • Bergeron v. STATE BOXING 829 So. 2d 620 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Molina v. City of New Orleans 830 So. 2d 994 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    See Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163, pp. 5-8 (La.1/16/96), -611 .
  • Acosta v. Boudreaux 824 So. 2d 1218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Gregor v. Argenot Great Central Ins. Co. 817 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), pp. 7-8, -11 .
  • Perkins v. Allstate Indem. Ins. Co. 821 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.01/16/96), .
  • Taylor v. Entergy Corp. 816 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    95-2490, at p. 10, 687 So.2d at 1093 (citing Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, pp. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), -11 ).
  • Vlk v. Millers Casualty Insurance 813 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    1059 , 127 L.Ed.2d 379 (1994), and Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Bowie v. Young 813 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Harrison v. Richardson 806 So. 2d 954 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Lofton v. Hayward 806 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 4/7/99) , : In our review of the trial court’s allocation of fault between the defendant’s [sic], we are guided by Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), -611 .
  • Kimberly v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development 805 So. 2d 428 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Corbello v. Iowa Production 806 So. 2d 32 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Cox v. Moore 805 So. 2d 277 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Wheelis v. CGU INS. 803 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Hughes v. Bossier Parish School Board, 32,225 (La.App.2d Cir.10/29/99), ; Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Armstrong v. City of New Orleans 806 So. 2d 690 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • Calcagno v. Kuebel, Fuchs Partnership 802 So. 2d 746 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), ; Hebert v. Brown Bottling Group, 98-0924 (La.10/30/98), .
  • Clark v. Burchard 802 So. 2d 824 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, p. 7 (La.1/16/96), -11 .
  • Adams v. Parish of East Baton Rouge 804 So. 2d 679 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163, pp. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Gunn v. Robertson 801 So. 2d 555 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), ; Herbert v. Brown Bottling Group, 98-0924 (La.10/30/98), .
  • Linnear v. Mutual Service Cas. Ins. Co. 799 So. 2d 634 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.01/16/96), .
  • Davis v. Hoffman 800 So. 2d 1028 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, p. 7 (La.1/16/96), -11 .
  • Taylor v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 796 So. 2d 802 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, (La.1/16/96), .
  • Davis v. Smith 796 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), ; Barnes v. Reed, 32-380 (La.App.2d Cir.10/29/99), .
  • Leaman v. Continental Cas. Co. 798 So. 2d 285 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    Dufrene, 721 So.2d at 1036 (Citing Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), ).
  • Hughes v. Scottsdale Ins. Co. 793 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), ; Holt v. State Through Dept. of Transp.
  • Fontenot v. Southwestern Offshore Corp. 787 So. 2d 588 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    10/30/00); ; Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Garcia v. LOUISIANA DOTD 787 So. 2d 1142 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    The Louisiana Supreme Court in Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, p. 5 (La.1/16/96), , 609 stated "[O]nly after making the finding that the record supports that the lower court abused its much discretion can the appellate court disturb the award, and then only to the extent of lowering it (or raising it) to the highest (or lowest) point *1147 which is reasonably within the discretion afforded that cou
  • Fleniken v. Entergy Corp. 780 So. 2d 1175 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163, pp. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), ; Barsavage v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 96-0688, pp. 9-10 (La.App.
  • Snearl v. Mercer 780 So. 2d 563 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, p. 7-8 (La.1/16/96), ; Leatherman v. Riverside Village, 95-2227, p. 4 (La.App.
  • Odom v. City of Lake Charles 790 So. 2d 51 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96); .
  • Melerine v. State 773 So. 2d 831 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    That standard was explained by the Louisiana Supreme Court as follows in Clement v. Frey, 95-1119 (La.1/16/96), : Regarding the allocation of fault in this circumstance, we adopt the standard set forth in Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., 341 So.2d [332], 335 [(La.
  • Thomas v. Allstate Insurance Co. 774 So. 2d 1237 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), .
  • Dennis v. the Finish Line, Inc. 781 So. 2d 12 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    Clement v. Frey, 95-1119, 95-1163 (La.1/16/96), ; Barsavage, 686 So.2d at 962 ; Lee, 751 So.2d at 325 .