Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Etienne v. National Auto. Ins. Co., 759 So. 2d 51.

29 citing documents.

Danny Ray Gilcrease v. Maximus Operating, Ltd. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
Explained Barrynee Moore v. Sky Zone Franchise Group, LLC, Abc Corporation and Xyz Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
4/25/00), “Article 1153 and the Ray criteria typically apply to determine if a supplemental petition relates back to the filing of the original petition in situations where the wrong party has been named as the original defendant, and not, as here when additional solidary obligors are named.” Al
Dorothy Banish Madden v. Steven Ray Fairburn, K.S. Timber Company, Inc., Plaza Insurance Company, XYZ Insurance Company, & … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
Evelyn Burlison v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
Timothy D. Koehl Versus Rli Insurance Company, Geico General Insurance Company, Packard Truck Lines, L.L.C., and Robert T. … La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
4/25/00), Carrier v. Reliance Ins.
Explained Michael Smith v. Acadian Ambulance Service, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
4/25/00), “Article 1153 and the Ray criteria typically apply to determine if a supplemental petition relates back to the filing of the original petition in situations where the wrong party has been named as the original defendant, and not, as here when additional solidary obligors are named.” When a plaintiff claims tha
Sheila Williams v. Angela [april] Montgomery, And La. 2021
4/25/00), Wimberly v. Brown, 07-559, p. 5 (La.App.
In re Med. Review Complaint By Daron Downing 272 So. 3d 55 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
Enrico Bunyog v. Berkley Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
Love v. Certain Underwriters At Lloyd's London 241 So. 3d 1121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
4/25/00), , 56 ; Kinchen v. Metropolitan Property & Cas.
Russell v. Michael G. Jones, Riley & Carroll Props., Inc. 239 So. 3d 1083 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Distinguished Meagan Lemoine v. Lionel Augustine La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
4/25/00), in support of their prohibited direct action argument, we note that case is clearly distinguishable because the plaintiffs therein for all intents and purposes sued the insurer alone.
Correro v. Caldwell 166 So. 3d 442 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
Co., 1999-2610 (La.04/25/00), .
Roberts v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co. 168 So. 3d 418 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Co., 99-2610 (La.4/25/00), .
Mary Ann Charles Calbert v. Orlando J. Batiste La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
4/25/00), -57; Perkins v. Willie, 2003-0126, pp. 4 & 6 (La.App.
Calbert v. Batiste 23 So. 3d 1031 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Co., 99-2610, p. 7 (La.4/25/00), -57 ; Perkins v. Willie, 2003-0126, pp. 4 & 6 (La.App.
Cutsinger v. Redfern 12 So. 3d 945 La. 2009
Co., 99-2610, p. 4 (La.4/25/00), .
Faye O. Jeansonne v. New York Life Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
4/25/00), (under direct action statute, driver’s claim against automobile liability insurer arising out of accident would be dismissed for failure to join insured, where driver did not bring suit against named insured until more than three years after accident, and record did not indicate, and driver did not allege, that any of
Jeansonne v. New York Life Insurance Co. 11 So. 3d 1160 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
12/17/99), , affirmed, 99-2610 (La.4/25/00), (under direct action statute, driver's claim against automobile liability insurer arising out of accident would be dismissed for failure to join insured, where driver did not bring suit against named insured until more than three years after accident, and record did not indicate, and driver did not allege, that any of
Roccaforte v. WING ZONE, INC. 994 So. 2d 126 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Co., 99-2610, p. 5 (La.4/25/00), -56 , the supreme court explained that the legislature codified its holding in Sampay that dismissal of a solidary obligor from suit does not prohibit an obligee from proceeding against remaining solidary obligorsby enacting LSA-C.C.
Wheat v. Nievar 984 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Co., 99-2610, p. 7 (La.4/25/00), -57 ; Perkins v. Willie, XXXX-XXXX, pp. 4 & 6 (La.
Wimberly v. Brown 973 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
Co., 99-2610, p. 7 (La.4/25/00), .
Richard J. Murray, Jr., Et Ux. v. Town of Mansura La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Murray v. Town of Mansura 940 So. 2d 832 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Co., 99-2610 (La.4/25/00), .
Barbara Miguez v. Platinum Underwriters Reinsurance, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
4/25/00), quoting Magnon v. Collins, 98-2822 (La.
Hodges v. Republic Western Ins. Co. 921 So. 2d 175 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
Co., 99-2610, p. 7 (La.4/25/00), -57 (noting that the relation back theory typically applies when the plaintiff names the wrong defendant, not when the plaintiff seeks to add an alleged solidary obligor.)
Kinchen v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. 923 So. 2d 678 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Co., 99-2610, p. 6 (La.4/25/00), , involved an automobile accident and similar legal issues dealing with interruption of prescription where solidary obligors were named in an earlier suit.
McGuire v. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SERVICE 865 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Co., 99-2610 (La.4/25/00), .
Davis v. HUEY P. LONG REGIONAL MEDICAL 841 So. 2d 7 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Co., 99-2610 (La.4/25/00), .