Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Barreca v. Cobb, 668 So. 2d 1129.

31 citing documents.

Nicholas Jude Gregory and Sara Hummel Gregory and Progressive Bank v. Landowners Title of Ouachita L.L.C. and Continental … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation v. Merlin Lombard, II La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
Hospitality Management Services, LLC v. Axis Surplus Insurance Company, Firequest Fire Alarm Service Associates, LLC, and Brassco, Inc. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
2/28/96), (citation omitted).
Lynette Bayham and Adam Bayham v. State of Louisiana, through the Office of Group Benefits La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
Old Republic Life Insurance Co. v. TransWood Inc. 222 So. 3d 995 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
2/28/96), ; A. Copeland Enterprises, Inc., 657 So.2d at 1298-99 .
Amanda Carpenter v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
2/28/96), -32, in which the court held as follows 6 with regard to the relationship between the insured and the insurer under the principles of subrogation: [W]e hold that under the principles of subrogation, the insurer and the insured are co-owners of the right
Amanda Carpenter v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
2/28/96), the supreme court extended the holding reached in Moody to cases arising outside of workers’ compensation.
Paul Latiolais v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
2/28/96), stating “the insurer stands in the shoes of the insured and acquires the right to assert the actions and rights of the plaintiff.” See also Copeland Enters., Inc. v. Slidell Mem’l Hosp., 94-2011 (La.
Latiolais v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. 74 So. 3d 872 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Louisiana Civil Code Article 1825 defines subrogation as “the substitution of one person to the rights of another.” The supreme court explained a subrogees’ rights in Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651, p. 3 (La.2/28/96), , stating “the insurer stands in the shoes of the insured and acquires the right to assert the actions and rights of the plaintiff.” See also Copeland Enters., Inc. v. Slidell Mem’l Hosp., 94-2011 (La.6/30/95), .
Caro Properties (A), LLC v. City of Gretna 3 So. 3d 29 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
For example, in Barreen v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), , a case cited by Caro, the court was required to interpret two seemingly incompatible clauses of an insurance contract.
Doucet v. Gayden 971 So. 2d 382 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
City of Alexandria v. Lafayette Surgical Hospital, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2/28/96), the 29 Louisiana Supreme Court pronounced: 30 this court stated that 31 when an employer pays worker’s compensation to its employee who has 32 been injured by the wrongful act of a third person, the employer and the 33 employee be
City of Alexandria v. Lafayette Surgical Hospital, L.L.C. 953 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
In Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651, p. 4 (La.2/28/96), , the Louisiana Supreme Court pronounced: this court stated that when an employer pays worker’s compensation to its employee who has been injured by the wrongful act of a third person, the employer and the employee become co-owners of a property right consisting of th
Liberty Mutual v. Noble 889 So. 2d 1158 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), .
Eleanor Haik Etie Bazer v. Honda Motor Co., Ltd La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
2/28/96), and La.Civ.Code arts.
Bazer v. Honda Motor Co. 872 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
2 Cir. 5/5/99), (citing Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), , and La.
Murray v. German Mut. Ins. Co. 856 So. 2d 81 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
[2] In Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), , the holding of Moody was expanded beyond the realm of workers' compensation to subrogation.
Masters v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 840 So. 2d 665 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Both Mr. and Mrs. Masters, as well as State Farm, cite Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), , as authority for their opposing positions.
Safeway Ins. Co. of Louisiana v. State Farm 839 So. 2d 1022 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.02/28/96), ; La.
Board of Trustees, State Employees Group Benefits Program v. LeBlanc 827 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
In Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96); , the Louisiana Supreme Court considered a similarly worded policy in a case in which the insurer was notified by the insured of a pending suit.
Dauphin v. Lafayette Ins. Co. 817 So. 2d 144 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651, pp. 2-3 (La.2/28/96); .
Dickens v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. 762 So. 2d 1193 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96); .
Bailsco Blades & Casting v. Fireman's Fund 737 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), ; *167 La.
STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. v. Berthelot 732 So. 2d 1230 La. 1999
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), ; see SAÚL LITVINOFF, THE LAW OF OBLIGATIONS 268 (1992) (referencing 7 PLAINIOL ET RIPERT, TRAITÉ PRATIQUE DE DROIT CIVIL FRANCAIS 625 (2d ed.1954)).
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Berthelot 732 So. 2d 1230 La. 1999
Barreca, v. Cobb, 95-1651 (La.2/28/96), ; see SAÚL LITVINOFF, THE LAW OF OBLIGATIONS 268 (1992) (referencing 7 Plain-iol et RipeRt, Traité Pratique de Droit Civil FRAnqais 625 (2d ed.1954)).
Hampton v. Marino 725 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Barreca v. Cobb, 95-1651, p. 2-3, (La.2/28/96); .
Dufrene v. Willingham 721 So. 2d 1026 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
Gray Insurance Co. v. Salvatierra 679 So. 2d 909 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
2/28/96); , the supreme court for the first time applied the rationale of Moody outside the law of workers’ compensation, holding that a health insurer and its insured are co-owners of the right to recover medical expenses caused by the wrongful act of a third person.
Great West Cas. Co. v. Manning 687 So. 2d 416 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Washington National Insurance Co. v. Arnaud 676 So. 2d 1130 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Hebert v. Jeffrey 671 So. 2d 904 La. 1996
2/28/96), , extended the Moody rule beyond the workers compensation arena.