DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite LeBreton v. Rabito, 714 So. 2d 1226.

137 citing documents.

  • Pleasure v. Louisiana Organ Procurement Agency 83 So. 3d 174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , the court ruled that in the medical malpractice context the filing of suit prior to convoking a medical review panel does not interrupt or suspend the running of prescription.
  • Oubre v. Louisiana Citizens Fair Plan 79 So. 3d 987 La. 2011
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 7 (La.7/8/98), ; Chappuis v. Reggie, 222 La.
  • McGlothlin v. Christus St. Patrick Hospital 65 So. 3d 1218 La. 2011
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 7 (La.7/8/98), ; Chappuis v. Reggie, 222 La.
  • Marenghi v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Co. 62 So. 3d 847 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    art. 1153 may not be applied to the medical malpractice action under the reasoning of LeBreton [v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), ] and Borel .
  • Sonya Reeder Seaman v. Charles W. Seaman La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Seaman v. Seaman 54 So. 3d 756 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    See LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Ferrara v. Starmed Staffing, LP 50 So. 3d 861 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 9 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Bosarge v. DePaul/Tulane Behavioral Health Center 39 So. 3d 790 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 6 (La.7/8/98), , citing Wimberly v. Gatch, 93-2361 (La.4/11/94), .
  • Slaughter v. NORTH OAKS MEDICAL CENTER 30 So. 3d 1183 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • Dowl v. Redi Care Home Health Ass'n 31 So. 3d 596 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    40:1299.47 B(l)(a)(i); see also LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 8 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Marino v. Tenet Healthsystem Medical Center, Inc. 26 So. 3d 297 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 6 (La.7/8/98), (citing Wimberly v. Gatch, 93-2361 (La.4/11/94), ).
  • Black v. St. Tammany Parish Hospital 25 So. 3d 711 La. 2009
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 7 (La.7/8/98), ; Chappuis v. Reggie, 222 La.
  • Toomer v. A-1 FENCE & PATIO, INC. 29 So. 3d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    art. 3466; LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), ; Bordelon v. Medical Ctr.
  • Toomer v. A-1 Fence & Patio, Inc. 29 So. 3d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    art. 3466; LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), ; Bordelon v. Medical Ctr.
  • Warren v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Co. 21 So. 3d 186 La. 2009
    § 9:5628 did not substantively change the law and reaffirmed Hebert's interpretation of the three-year provision as prescriptive, but found that under LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , plaintiffs' action had prescribed.
  • Reed v. St. Charles General Hospital 11 So. 3d 1138 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Pate v. Regional Transit Authority 8 So. 3d 744 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • May Yen v. Avoyelles Parish Police Jury La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    7/8/98), which held that the more specific provisions of the MMA applied to the exclusion of the Louisiana Civil Code’s provisions regarding the interruption of prescription by filing suit against alleged joint tortfeasors found in La.Civ.Code art. 2324(C).
  • Yen v. Avoyelles Parish Police Jury 5 So. 3d 1002 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    We based our decision, though, upon LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , which held that the more specific provisions of the MMA applied to the exclusion of the Louisiana Civil Code’s provisions regarding the interruption of prescription by filing suit against alleged joint tortfeasors found in La.Civ.Code art. 2324(C).
  • Wilbert Curry v. Javell McGinnis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    onized if possible; however, if there is a conflict, the statute specifically directed to the matter at issue must prevail as an exception to the statute more general in character.” City of Pineville v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3352, 00-1983 (La.6/29/01), LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98)
  • Curry v. McGinnis 3 So. 3d 615 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    t matter, they should be harmonized if possible; however, if there is a conflict, the statute specifically directed to the matter at issue must prevail as an exception to the statute more general in character.” City of Pineville v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3352, 00-1983 (La.6/29/01), ; LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Pickett v. WILLIS-KNIGHTON PIERREMONT 998 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.07/08/98), ; Collum, supra .
  • Bridges v. Mosaic Global Holdings, Inc. 23 So. 3d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    After the cause for the suspension ends, the prescriptive time begins running and the “time which precede[d] the suspension is added to the time which follows it to compose the necessary period; only the period of the suspension is deducted.” LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 6 (La.7/8/98), (quoting G. Baudier-Lacantinerie & A. Tissier, TRAITE THEORIQUE ET PRA-TIQUE DE DROIT CIVIL, No. 415 at 221-22 (4th ed.1924), reprinted in 5 CIVIL LAW TRANSLATIONS at 21-22 (La.
  • Borel v. Young 989 So. 2d 42 La. 2008
    The court of appeal, found both time provisions prescriptive, and examined defendants' exception of prescription in light of LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Maersk Line, Ltd. v. Adatto 981 So. 2d 692 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    4 Cir. 7/11/01), , citing LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • In Re: Elijah Herring La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • In Re Herring 974 So. 2d 924 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    This argument is based upon the supreme court's holdings in Guitreau v. Kucharchuk, 99-2570 (La.5/16/00), , and LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • In Re Med. Malprac. Claims Regard. Diecidue 972 So. 2d 485 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 8 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Burney v. EUNICE POLICE DEPT. 971 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), ."
  • May Yen v. Avoyelles Parish Police Jury La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    7/9/98), the supreme court overruled the holding in Hernandez v. Lafayette Bone & Joint Clinic, (La.App.
  • Wanda G. Burney v. Eunice Police Department La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), ” City of Pineville v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3352, 00-1983, p. 4 (La.
  • Yen v. Avoyelles Parish Police Jury 971 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    In LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/9/98), , the supreme court overruled the holding in Hernandez v. Lafayette Bone & Joint Clinic, (La.App.
  • Wimberly v. Brown 973 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3352, 00-1983, p. 4 (La.6/29/01), ; LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 7 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Moon Ventures, LLC v. Kpmg, LLP La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    3/11/05), which are more recent than Saia, stand for the premise that, based on LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), in the context of the MMA, a suit filed before a review panel is requested is premature even if no exception of prematurity is filed, and that the failure to file the exception of prematurity does not prevent the assertion of prescription, or here, peremption.
  • Moon Ventures, LLC v. KPMG, LLP 964 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    4 Cir. 10/13/04) , , writs denied, 05-7 (La.3/11/05), , which are more recent than Saia, stand for the premise that, based on LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , in the context of the MMA, a suit filed before a review panel is requested is premature even if no exception of prematurity is filed, and that the failure to file the exception of prematurity does not prevent the assertion of prescription, or here, peremption.
  • Cipriano v. Pulitzer 959 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 6 (La.7/8/98), , quoting, G. Baudier-Lacantinerie A. Tissier, TRAITE THEORIQUE ET PRATIQUE DE DROIT CIVIL, Nos. 415, 368, 389 (4 ed.1924), reprinted in 5 CIVIL LAW TRANSLATIONS at 15 (La.
  • In Re Noe 958 So. 2d 617 La. 2007
    97-2221, p. 6 (La.7/8/98), , quoting Everett v. Goldman
  • Walter R. Cox, Sr. v. Bruce P. Bordlee, M.D. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
  • Mitchell v. Rehabilitation Institute of New Orleans, Inc. 953 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    Citing the Louisiana Supreme Court’s decision in LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , the trial court concluded that La.
  • Borel v. Young 947 So. 2d 824 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    40:1299.47(A)(2)(a); LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Minos Borel, Sr. v. Lafayette General Medical Center La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
  • Woman's Hospital Foundation of Baton Rouge v. Bolton 951 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
    In LeBreton *1112 v. Rabilo, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , the Louisiana Supreme Court held that a plaintiff cannot benefit from both an interruption of prescription, by prematurely filing a suit C.C.
  • LaCoste v. PENDLETON METHODIST HOS., LLC 947 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
    We understand this act to be at the very least precautionary in light of the Louisiana Supreme Court's decision in LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , and its progeny, which holds that filing a claim sounding in medical malpractice in the trial court prior to seeking a medical review panel does not interrupt prescription against the health care provider.
  • Bush v. National Health Care of Leesville 939 So. 2d 1216 La. 2006
    At issue in this medical malpractice claim is whether this court's holding in LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , applies retroactively.
  • Dianna Broussard v. Lafayette Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
  • Broussard v. Lafayette Parish School Bd. 939 So. 2d 662 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221, p. 7 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Delbert W. Bush v. National Health Care of Leesville La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • Bush v. National Health Care of Leesville 923 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    Additionally, Dr. Lujan-Baez contends suit against her in district court does not interrupt prescription under the holding of LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Filson v. Windsor Court Hotel 907 So. 2d 723 La. 2005
    City of Pineville v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3352, 00-1983 (La.6/29/01), ; LeBreton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), .
  • Metropolitan Development Center v. Liner 891 So. 2d 62 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    Finally, Liner maintains that Le *64 Breton v. Rabito, 97-2221 (La.7/8/98), , is not on point in this Lease and did not address whether La.