DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Porteous v. St. Ann's Cafe & Deli, 713 So. 2d 454.

18 citing documents.

  • Small v. Rouse's Enterprises, LLC 221 So. 3d 212 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    5/29/98), , an action against a restaurant for a deleterious substance (a pearl) present in a customer’s oyster sandwich, the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected the application of strict liability and held that the.
  • Verrett v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. 207 So. 3d 621 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2016
  • Rhodes v. Schultis 140 So. 3d 331 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Ann’s Café & Deli, 97-837 (La.5/29/98); ; Gagliano v. Amax Metals Recovery, Inc., 96-1751 (La.App.
  • Baudy v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Connecticut 140 So. 3d 125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Ann’s Cafe & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), , in support of their claim that the trial court erred in granting defendants’ motion for directed verdict after plaintiffs rested their case, but before defendants rested their case.
  • Chambers-Johnson v. Applebee's Restaurant 101 So. 3d 473 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Ann’s Cafe & Deli, 97-837 (La.5/29/98), .
  • Zumpe v. Zara's Little Giant Super Market, Inc. 35 So. 3d 1158 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Ann’s Café and Deli, 97-0837, p. 1 (La.5/29/98), , Zara’s argued that it cannot be liable for Ms. Zumpe’s injury because an olive pit is a naturally occurring substance that a customer would reasonably expect to find in olive salad.
  • Brailey v. Wendy's International, Inc. 997 So. 2d 904 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    5/29/98), , the supreme court rejected the long-standing "foreign-natural" test employed by the courts in favor of a traditional duty/risk analysis under La.Civ.Code arts.
  • Williams v. a & M Operating Co., Inc. 973 So. 2d 138 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    Ann's Café & Deli, 97-0837 (La.05/29/98), , a restaurant-harmful food product case, the supreme court found that the proper analysis to determine a defendant's liability is the traditional duty risk tort analysis.
  • Poplar v. Dillard's Dept. Stores, Inc. 864 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    Ann's Cafe & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), , for the proposition that in restaurant harmful food cases the duty-risk analysis is the applicable law.
  • LeBlanc v. Trappey 838 So. 2d 860 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    Ann's Café & Deli, 97-837 p. 5 (La.5/29/98); .
  • Wimberly v. B.P. Newman Invstments, Inc. 805 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Ann's Café & Deli, 97-0837 *254 (La.5/29/98); .
  • Anderson v. Piccadilly Cafeteria, Inc. 804 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Ann’s Café & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), .
  • Abadie v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 784 So. 2d 46 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    Ann's Cafe & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), .
  • Paul v. LOUISIANA STATE EMPLOYEES'GROUP 762 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    Ann's Cafe & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), -57 .
  • Baggett v. Brumfield 758 So. 2d 332 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    [15] Porteous v. Saint Ann's Café & Deli, 97-837 (La.5/29/98); .
  • Cain v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc. 757 So. 2d 712 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    Ann's Cafe & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), , contains the Louisiana Supreme Court's latest pronouncement regarding the law applicable to determine the liability of a food provider when a customer is injured by a harmful substance in the food.
  • Richard v. Swiber 760 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    Ann's Cafe & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98), -67 .
  • Bullara v. CHECKER'S DRIVE-IN RESTAURANT 736 So. 2d 936 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
    Ann's Café & Deli, 97-0837 (La.5/29/98); , the Louisiana Supreme Court held the proper analysis to determine a defendant's liability in a restaurant-harmful food product case is found in Louisiana's substantive law as reflected in the Louisiana Civil Code articles pertaining to liability and damages for offenses and quasi offenses— the traditional duty risk