DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 737 So. 2d 720.

65 citing documents.

  • 639 Julia Street Partners v. City of New Orleans 830 So. 2d 1131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Jenkins v. Dyess 821 So. 2d 722 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    The court stated that “the breach of the duty to right a wrong and make the plaintiff whole simply cannot be a continuing wrong which suspends the running of prescription, as that is the purpose of any lawsuit and the obligation of every tortfea-sor.” In re Moses, supra, citing Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Estate of Patout v. City of New Iberia 813 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Supreme Court Review of Second Appeal The supreme court remanded these consolidated matters to this court, instructing us to reconsider the defendants' prescription exceptions in light of its decision in Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Perrilloux v. Stilwell 814 So. 2d 60 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    art. 3493, Revision Comment (c); Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Corbello v. Iowa Production 806 So. 2d 32 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Crump v. Sabine River Auth., 98-2326, p. 7 (La.6/29/99); .
  • Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. Entergy Corp. 804 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Estate of Patout v. City of New Iberia 803 So. 2d 978 La. 2001
    Granted and remanded to the Court of Appeal for its consideration of relator’s prescription exception in light of Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Estate of Patout v. City of New Iberia 803 So. 2d 979 La. 2001
    Granted and remanded to the Court of Appeal for its consideration of relator’s prescription exception in light of Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Estate of Patout v. City of New Iberia 803 So. 2d 978 La. 2001
    Granted and remanded to the Court of Appeal for its consideration of relator's prescription exception in light of Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Explained Bourg v. Morning Star Benevolent Ass'n 804 So. 2d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    The Louisiana Supreme Court recently stated the following: Recently, we clarified the continuing tort doctrine in a property law case, Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Estate of Patout v. City of New Iberia 791 So. 2d 741 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    Relying on the supreme court's decision in Crump v. Sabine River Auth., 98-2326 (La.6/29/99); , the trial court entered judgment for the second time, concluding that those claims arising after February 24, 1981, [1] had prescribed but that those arising previous to that date had not.
  • In Re Medical Review Panel, Claim of Moses 788 So. 2d 1173 La. 2001
    [7] Citing this court's holding in Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), , that a continuing tort does not result from the continuation of the ill effects of an original, wrongful act, a dissenting appellate court judge opined that the continuing tort doctrine is inapplicable in this case, stating: In this case, the acts of malpractice were the UMC physicians' failure to remove all of the
  • Darby v. Wal-Mart, Inc. 775 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Collum v. EA Conway Medical Center 763 So. 2d 808 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), .
  • Jeter v. Shamblin 750 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    Crump v. Sabine River Authority, 98-2326 (La.6/29/99), (emphasis added).