DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 721 So. 2d 885.

400 citing documents.

  • Hofler v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. 57 So. 3d 1128 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    The phrase “reasonably controvert” means that the employer or insurer must have “some valid reason or evidence on which to base his denial of benefits.” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 1998-1063 (La.12/01/98), ; City of Bossier City v. Colvin, 45,278 (La.App.2d Cir.05/19/10), .
  • Bell v. Mid City Printers, Inc. 54 So. 3d 1226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In Brown v. Tex-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), , the Louisiana Supreme Court explained: In general, one can surmise from the plain meaning of the words making up the phrase “reasonably controvert” that in order to reasonably controvert a claim, the defendant must have some valid reason or evidence upon which to base his denial of benefits.
  • Tim Weaver v. Southern Erectors, Inc. of Florida La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Juanita Quinn v. Vidalia Apparel La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Weaver v. Southern Erectors, Inc. of Florida 53 So. 3d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    *555 A claim for benefits has been reasonably controverted when the employer “engaged in a nonfrivolous legal dispute or possessed factual and/or medical information to reasonably counter the factual and medical information presented by the claimant throughout the time he refused to pay all or part of the benefits allegedly owed.” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Quinn v. Vidalia Apparel 54 So. 3d 123 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    The supreme court discussed the difference between an arbitrary and capricious standard and a reasonably controverted standard in Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Iberia Medical Center v. Ward 53 So. 3d 421 La. 2010
    “Arbitrary and capricious behavior consists of willful and unreasoning action, without consideration and regard for facts and circumstances presented, or of seemingly unfounded motivation.” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 1998-1063, p. 8-9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Barbara Carradine v. Regis Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Carradine v. Regis Corp. 52 So. 3d 181 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    A claim for benefits has been reasonably controverted when the employer “engaged in a nonfrivo-lous legal dispute or possessed factual and/or medical information to reasonably counter the factual and medical information presented by the claimant throughout the time he refused to pay all or part of the benefits allegedly owed.” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Rastegar v. Magnolia School, Inc. 51 So. 3d 47 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Manuel Lumpkin v. A.B.E.L. Trucking of Louisiana, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    See Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, pp. 8-9 (La.12/1/98)
  • Lumpkin v. A.B.E.L. Trucking of Louisiana LLC. 40 So. 3d 422 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    See Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, pp. 8-9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • City of Bossier City v. Colvin 36 So. 3d 1207 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    The phrase “reasonably controvert” means that the employer or insurer must have “some valid reason or evidence on which to base his denial of benefits.” Brown v. Tex-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; J.P.
  • Shawn Gradney v. Louisiana Commercial Laundry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Gradney v. LOUISIANA COMMERCIAL LAUNDRY 38 So. 3d 1115 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    23:1201(F); Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Billy Jo Massingill v. Dunham Price Group, L.L.C. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Brown v. Texas-La Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, (La.12/1/98)
  • Ragle Celestine v. Firestone Polymers, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    12/1/98), the supreme court further defined the meaning of “reasonably controverted:” The phrase “reasonably controverted,” on the other hand, mandates a different standard.
  • Massingill v. Dunham Price Group, L.L.C. 38 So. 3d 498 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, (La.12/1/98), .
  • Celestine v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C. 38 So. 3d 527 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    *538 In Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), , the supreme court further defined the meaning of “reasonably controverted:” The phrase “reasonably controverted,” on the other hand, mandates a different standard.
  • Dugan v. St. Francis Medical Center 34 So. 3d 1157 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    The phrase “reasonably controvert” means that the defendant must have “some valid reason or evidence on which to base his denial of benefits.” Brown v. Tex-LA *1164 Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; J.P.
  • Barbara Leger v. Calcasieu Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Leger v. Calcasieu Parish School Board 34 So. 3d 1042 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    It reads: “This subsection shall not apply if the claim is reasonably controverted or if such nonpayment results from conditions over which the employer or insurer had no control.” We note that our supreme court has discussed the meaning of “reasonably controverted” in Brown v. Texas-La Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Goldsby v. PILGRIM'S PRIDE CORP. 33 So. 3d 969 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 1998-1063 (La.12/01/98), .
  • Branch v. New Orleans Saints 31 So. 3d 627 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 8 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Delatte v. PALA GROUP, LLC 35 So. 3d 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Larry Burns v. Interstate Brands Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), Thibodeaux v. L.S.
  • Burns v. Interstate Brands Corp. 30 So. 3d 271 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; Thibodeaux v. L.S.
  • Kenneth Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, LLC 30 So. 3d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    An employer could reasonably controvert a claim if the employer “engaged in a nonfrivolous legal dispute or possessed factual and/or medical information to reasonably counter the factual and medical information presented by the claimant throughout the time he refused to pay all or part of the benefits allegedly owed.” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Roshawn Pete v. Quality Construction Specialists La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Pete v. Quality Construction Specialists & Bridgefield Casualty Insurance Co. 25 So. 3d 241 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    An employer could reasonably controvert a claim if the employer “engaged in a nonfrivolous legal dispute or possessed factual and/or medical information to reasonably counter the factual and medical information presented by the claimant....” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • James v. a & B BUILDERS 29 So. 3d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Perrilloux v. First Guaranty Bank 29 So. 3d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Brown v. Texas-LA Callage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 9 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Sharp v. St. Tammany Marine & Powersports 23 So. 3d 347 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    See Brown, v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), , 889 and 891 n. 5.
  • J.P. Morgan Chase v. Louis 12 So. 3d 440 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    The phrase “reasonably controvert” means that the defendant must have “some valid reason or evidence on which to base his denial of benefits.” Brown v. *448 Tex-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; Williams v. Mark Johnson Plumbing, 38,954 (La.App.
  • Thomas v. Hollywood Casino 13 So. 3d 717 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    The phrase “reasonably controvert” means that the defendant must have “some valid reason or evidence on which to base his denial of benefits.” Brown v. Tex-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; Williams v. Mark Johnson Plumbing, 38,954 (La.App.
  • Sevin v. Chevrolet 24 So. 3d 879 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Ledford v. New Orleans Saints 10 So. 3d 866 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • Reed v. St. Francis Medical Center 8 So. 3d 824 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    To “reasonably controvert” a claim means the employer or insurer had “some valid reason or evidence upon which to *830 base [the] denial of benefits.” Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; Lemons v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 42,950 (La.App.
  • Gregory Scott v. City of Pineville La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), Thibodeaux v. L.S.
  • Scott v. City of Pineville 8 So. 3d 813 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), ; Thibodeaux v. L.S.
  • Acadian Ambulance Service, Inc. v. Jamie Darbonne La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • Acadian Ambulance Service, Inc. v. Darbonne 6 So. 3d 855 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Johnson v. Bossier Parish School Board 3 So. 3d 580 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/01/98), (citations omitted).
  • Sisk v. a P Supply Co. 2 So. 3d 1201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 1998-1063 (La.12/01/98), .
  • Zavala v. St. Joe Brick Works 999 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • Borel v. Young 989 So. 2d 42 La. 2008
    State v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Com'n, 94-1872, 94-1914, p. 17, n. 10 (La.5/22/95), n. 10 ; SWAT 24 Shreveport Bossier, Inc. v. Bond, 00-1695, p. 17 (La.6/29/01), ; Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 7 (La.12/1/98), ; Louisiana Civil Service League v. Forbes, 258 La.
  • Landry v. LOUISIANA CITIZENS PROPERTY INS. 983 So. 2d 66 La. 2008
    See also Brown v. Texas-La Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, p. 7 (La.12/1/98), ("Where a new statute is worded differently from the preceding statute, the legislature is presumed to have intended to change the law."); , 258 La.
  • Montanez v. BAYOU INSULATION & GARAGE DOORS 991 So. 2d 497 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    In support of this point, Bayou Insulators cites Brown v. Texas-La Cartage, Inc., 98-1063, pp. 9-10 (La.12/1/98), .
  • Brien v. Leon Angel Constructors, Inc. 978 So. 2d 576 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage Inc., 98-1063 (La.12/01/98), (citations omitted).