Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 714 So. 2d 715.

58 citing documents.

Akili Johari Senior v. Overlog Inc. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
Scott Vicknair, LLC v. Wayne Robinson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
Hospital Service District No 1 of the Parish of Lasalle, State of Louisiana v. J. Reed Walters, District … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
Since suit is not proper in one parish as to both Defendants, Hardtner argues the doctrine of “ancillary venue” as utilized in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), applies.
Carl J. Calamia, Jr. Cathy Calamia Giancoatieri and Karen Calamia, Individually and as the Children of Carl J. … La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2020
7/8/98), - 720, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that otherwise properly cumulated actions against two political subdivisions located in different parishes, arising out of the same transaction or occurrence, may be brought in either parish, despite the requirement of La.
Wholesale Auto Group, Inc. v. The Louisiana Motor Vehicle Commission and The Louisiana Used Motor Vehicle Commission La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
7/ 8/ 98), and Black v. St.
Steven Jackson v. Greenwich Insurance Company, Shane Benoit, Testing Holdings USA, Inc., and/or Intertak AKA Intertek USA, Inc., … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
Biloxi Capital, LLC v. Lobell 241 So. 3d 505 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2018
Perniciaro v. McInnis 222 So. 3d 987 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
7/8/98), -18 , found that because the statute uses the term “shall,” the legislature intended that a political subdivision of the state can only be sued in a venue specified by this statute, and thus no other venue exceptions would be applicable.
Reneka Shepard on Behalf of Her Minor Child Lynkeith James, Jr. v. George Coleman La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
“Venue provisions are significantly different from jurisdictional provisions.” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98)
State v. Foret 174 So. 3d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
See Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/08/98), .
Willis-Knighton Health System, Inc. v. Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments 162 So. 3d 396 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 3 (La.7/8/98), ; La.Code Civ.
State v. Foret 156 So. 3d 43 La. 2015
See Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/08/98), .
State v. Foret 155 So. 3d 514 La. 2015
See Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/08/98), .
McKenzie v. Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. 122 So. 3d 42 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
“Venue provisions are significantly different from jurisdictional provisions.” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
McLean v. Majestic Mortuary Services Inc. 96 So. 3d 571 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2012
The concept of ancillary venue allows such claims to be tried together for reasons of judicial economy and efficiency, even though venue is not proper technically for one claim or one party.” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 8 (La.7/8/98), .
Whitley v. State Ex Rel. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University Agricultural Mechanical College Ex Rel. Medical … 66 So. 3d 470 La. 2011
In the context of venue, this court has recognized that "the permissive 'may' and the mandatory ‘shall’ have often been interchanged.” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Land v. Vidrine 62 So. 3d 36 La. 2011
p. 8 (La.10/20/09), , we stated: This Court has determined that the Louisiana Civil Code of Procedure “articles governing venue are based on legislative considerations for allocating cases, according to the particular action and the particular parties, among the various parishes which have an interest in the action ...” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Prejean v. Guillory 38 So. 3d 274 La. 2010
Jacobs v. City of Bunkie, 98-2510, p. 6 (La.5/18/99), ; Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 4 (La.7/8/98), ; La.Rev.
Black v. St. Tammany Parish Hospital 25 So. 3d 711 La. 2009
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 3 (La.7/8/98), ; La.Code *715 | (iCiv.
LeBlanc v. Thomas 23 So. 3d 241 La. 2009
This Court has determined that the Louisiana Civil Code of Procedure “articles governing venue are based on legislative considerations for allocating cases, according to the particular action and the particular parties, among the various parishes which have an interest in the action ...” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Freeman v. Bumbalough 17 So. 3d 1032 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
She conceded that the accident happened in Franklin, but argued (1) DOTD is an indispensable party to the ongoing proceedings in Caldwell Parish, (2) the trial court has discretion to allow an action against two political subdivisions to proceed in a parish with venue proper to one of them (Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), ), and (3) all the original defendants allowed her to file suit in Caldwell.
Seal v. FLORIDA GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY 17 So. 3d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Ealem v. Prevost Memorial Hospital 5 So. 3d 187 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
13:5104(B) “indicates a legislative intent that a single political subdivision can be sued only in one of two specified parishes and that no other exceptions are applicable.” Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 1997-1997, p. 5 (La.7/8/98), .
Ray Yell v. Leni Sumich La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
7/8/98), provides guidance.
Yell v. Sumich 997 So. 2d 69 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Although the supreme court has not directly addressed such a situation, I find the holding in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), , provides guidance.
Hubbard v. Pike 962 So. 2d 1094 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp ., 1997-1997 (La.07/08/98), .
Town of Homer v. UNITED HEALTHCARE OF LA. 948 So. 2d 1163 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Colvin v. LOUISIANA PATIENT'S COMP. FUND 947 So. 2d 15 La. 2007
97-1997 (La.7/8/98), -17 .
Solow v. Heard, McElroy & Vestal, LLP 937 So. 2d 875 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Explaining that doctrine, the Louisiana Supreme Court in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997, p. 8 (La.7/8/98), , stated: Ancillary venue applies when separate claims involving common or identical questions of fact share no common venue.
Premier Dodge, LLC v. Perrilloux 926 So. 2d 576 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 1997-1997 (La.7/8/98) .
Wharton v. Ridgell 922 So. 2d 461 La. 2006
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Louviere v. State 923 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 4 (La.7/8/98), .
Shreveport Citizens for Good Government v. City of Shreveport 910 So. 2d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
As noted in Underwoood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), , La.
National Linen Service v. City of Monroe 889 So. 2d 1186 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
As held by the supreme court in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.07/08/98), , the use of the word "shall" in La.
Hatten v. Schwerman Trucking Co. 889 So. 2d 448 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Underwood v. Lane Mem'l Hosp., 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Mac Hatten v. Schwerman Trucking Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Central National Insurance Co. of Omaha v. Jacobs Constructors, Inc. 875 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
4 Cir. 5/12/99), , quoting Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), , this Court discussed the concept of ancillary venue as follows: Ancillary venue applies when separate claims involving common or identical question of fact share no common venue.
Arn Smith and Deidre Bell Smith v. City of Lake Charles Police Department La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Smith v. City of Lake Charles Police Department 858 So. 2d 869 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
The doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction was adopted, if not wholeheartedly, by the supreme court in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), .
Garrison v. St. Charles General Hospital 857 So. 2d 1092 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 6/23/00) , ; and Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997(La.7/8/98), .
Bertucci v. Lafayette Ins. Co. 851 So. 2d 1179 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
The doctrine of ancillary venue as described in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997, (La.7/8/98), , 719 is as follows: "Ancillary venue applies when separate claims involving common or identical questions of fact share no common venue.
Taylor v. Clement 832 So. 2d 1089 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
In Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 3 (La.7/8/98); , 716-17 the supreme court discussed the meaning of venue pursuant to Louisiana law: Venue means the parish where an action may properly be brought and tried under the rules regulating the subject.
Scarbrough v. J. Ray McDermott 833 So. 2d 436 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
ANCILLARY VENUE Ancillary venue was acknowledged, yet not necessarily embraced as a solution to all multiparty litigation venue problems, by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hosp., 97-1997, p. 8 (La.7/8/98), ; the Court stated: Ancillary venue applies when separate claims involving common or identical questions of fact share no common ven *443 ue.
LaFrance v. Doctors Insurance Reciprocal 821 So. 2d 481 La. 2002
In Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997, at p. 5 (La.07/8/98), , we held that the use of the word “shall” in La.
White v. Beauregard Memorial Hosp. 821 So. 2d 481 La. 2002
In Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997, at p. 5 (La.7/8/98), , we held that the use of the word "shall" in La.Rev.
White v. Beauregard Memorial Hosp. 809 So. 2d 1275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
In Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.7/8/98), , the supreme court resolved a venue dispute involving the application of La.R.S.
Bertucci v. Lafayette Insurance Co. 809 So. 2d 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Bernard Parish under the doctrine of ancillary venue established in Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997, (La.7/8/98), .
Albarado v. Union Pacific RR Co. 787 So. 2d 431 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
As a final point on venue, the concept of ancillary venue does not apply in the instant case, in contrast to Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997, where the court found ancillary venue to be proper.
Foltmer v. James 779 So. 2d 57 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
there was no single parish in which both defendants could be sued, so the Court applied the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction.
Nitro Gaming, Inc. v. DI Foods, Inc. 779 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
Underwood v. Lane Memorial Hospital, 97-1997 (La.07/08/98), .