DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Thomas v. Desire Community Housing Corp., 773 So. 2d 755.

18 citing documents.

  • Rogers v. Integrated Exploration & Prod., LLC 265 So. 3d 880 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    App. 4 Cir. 7/19/00), , 759 (recognizing that "arbitration is a substitute for litigation and that its purpose is to settle disputes in a fast, inexpensive manner before a tribunal chosen by the parties" and finding that the right to arbitration was waived by failing to seek timely supervisory review of a judgment granting the exception of
  • Ledbetter v. Homes by Paige, L.L.C. 110 So. 3d 141 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    4 Cir. 7/19/00) , (non-pecuniary damages awarded for breach of contract to build home that was culmination of a lifelong dream of rising from the housing projects to homeownership) and Mayerhofer v. Three R’s Inc., (La.App.
  • Rathborne v. Rathborne 999 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    4 Cir. 7/19/00) , , we held that a right to arbitration can be waived by not seeking timely review of the trial court's overruling of the exception of prematurity.
  • Sher v. Lafayette Ins. Co. 973 So. 2d 39 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • Bowser v. PREMIER AUTOMOTIVE GROUP 971 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
  • Ellis Const. v. Vieux Carre Resort Propert. 934 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
  • Explained Nicholas Rozas v. Keith Montero La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    4 Cir. 7/19/00), under the particular facts of that case: 8 [O]ne who claims entitlement to arbitration cannot make a pro forma request for it, file a reconventional demand and then sit on his rights for six and a half years, participat
  • Explained Rozas v. Montero 916 So. 2d 444 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    4 Cir. 7/19/00), , under the particular facts of that case: [O]ne who claims entitlement to arbitration cannot make a pro forma request for it, file a reconventional demand and then sit on his rights for six and a half years, participate in litigation and then after an adverse ruling cry "`Kings-X,' the judgment is invalid for wa
  • Dufrene v. HBOS MFG., LP 872 So. 2d 1206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
  • Lakeland Anesth., Inc. v. United Health. of La. 871 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    4 Cir. 7/19/00) , )(noting that "[a]n order denying arbitration may produce a `Catch 22' situation unless it is immediately appealable.") Explaining the "Catch 22" situation, we noted in Thomas that if a party fails to appeal a trial court ruling denying a motion to stay or to compel arbitration and thereafter participates in the proce
  • Explained Shelley W. West v. Bruner Health Group, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/19/00), under the particular facts of that case: [O]ne who claims entitlement to arbitration cannot make a pro forma request for it, file a reconventional demand and then sit on his rights for six and a half years, participate in litigation and then after an adverse ruling cry ‘“Kings-X,’ the ju
  • Explained West v. Bruner Health Group, Inc. 866 So. 2d 260 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/19/00), , under the particular facts of that case: [O]ne who claims entitlement to arbitration cannot make a pro forma request for it, file a reconventional demand and then sit on his rights for six and a half years, participate in litigation and then after an adverse ruling cry "`Kings-X,' the judgment is invalid for wa
  • Simpson v. Pep Boys-Manny Moe & Jack, Inc. 847 So. 2d 617 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
  • Pumpelly Oil, Inc. v. Ribbeck Const. Corp. 838 So. 2d 88 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/19/00) ; ; Albert K. Newlin, Inc. v. Morris, 99-1093 (La.App.
  • Bodenheimer v. New Orleans Public Belt and CSX Transportation, Inc. 828 So. 2d 77 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/19/00), , is applicable to the case at bar, where we *79 discussed at length the procedure for preserving a claim of arbitration rights.
  • Beasley v. Ed's Mobile Homes, Inc. 824 So. 2d 383 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 8/10/00) ; , a case involving the defective construction of a home, the court found that the nature of the contract to build the Thomas' home supported a nonpecuniary interest.
  • Shroyer v. Foster 814 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    App. 4th Cir.7/19/2000), ; MMR-Radon Constructors, Inc. v. Continental Ins.
  • Flatland Real Estate Co., LLC v. Dugas Const., Inc. 784 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 8/10/00) ; ; Albert K. Newlin, Inc. v. Morris, 99-1093 (La.App.