DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Adkins v. Huckabay, 755 So. 2d 206.

37 citing documents.

  • Jackson's Landing North v. Garnisha Phillips La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
    2/25/00), ) (citation omitted).
  • John Nickelson v. Henry Whitehorn and Kyle R. Ardoin, in his official capacity as Louisiana Secretary of State La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
  • Gaines v. Laura Wilson, State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 240 So. 3d 1010 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
  • Mark Sharbeno v. Allstate Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    In such cases, this court has emphasized the importance of deferring to the trier of fact’s finding, “as the trier of fact is not disadvantaged by the review of a cold record,” and “is in a superior position to observe the nuances of demeanor evidence not revealed in a record.” Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 at p. 16 (La.2/25/00)
  • Sharbeno v. Allstate Insurance Co. 153 So. 3d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    In such cases, this court has emphasized the importance of deferring to the trier of fact’s finding, “as the trier of fact is not disadvantaged by the review of a cold record,” and “is in a superior position to observe the nuances of demeanor evidence not revealed in a record.” Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 at p. 16 (La.2/25/00), .
  • In Re Madro BANDARIES 156 So. 3d 1152 La. 2014
    See, e.g., In re A.J.F., 00-0948 (La.6/30/00), ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Purvis v. Grant Parish School Board 144 So. 3d 922 La. 2014
    In such cases, this court has emphasized the importance of deferring to the trier of fact’s findings, “as the trier of fact is not disadvantaged by the review of a cold record,” and “is in a superior position to observe the nuances of demeanor evidence not revealed in a record.” Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 at p. 16 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Settle v. Bossier Parish School Board 93 So. 3d 1284 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    Additionally, courts are loathe to thwart the result of an election and will change that result only for grave and sufficient reasons.” The trial court, citing Adkins v. Huckabay, 1999-3605 (La.2/25/00), , restated the burden of proof and noted that the plaintiffs’ were required to show that because of fraud or irregularities, the outcome of the election either would have been different, or would have been impossible to determine.
  • State Ex Rel. Vb 24 So. 3d 281 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605, p. 15 (La.2/25/00), .
  • State in the Interest of V.B., A.B., P.B. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State ex rel. V.B. 24 So. 3d 281 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    is in a superior position to observe the nuances of demean- or evidence not revealed in a record.” Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605, p. 15 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Mike Stoute v. Petroleum Center La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • Stoute v. Petroleum Center 980 So. 2d 818 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Glen Lipsey v. Jay Dardenne, La. Secretary of State La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    2/25/2000), stated that a party contesting an election no longer must show that “but for” the irregularity he would have won the election.
  • Lipsey v. DARDENNE 970 So. 2d 1237 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    Louisiana Revised Statutes 18:1432 [10] now provides the grounds for nullifying an election: Considering this language, the Louisiana Supreme Court in Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/2000), , stated that a party contesting an election no longer must show that "but for" the irregularity he would have won the election.
  • In Re Leblanc 972 So. 2d 315 La. 2007
    See, e.g., In re A.J.F., 00-0948 (La.6/30/00), ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Henrietta Williams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    2/25/00), cited by Defendant, is inapplicable to the present case.
  • State v. Williams 953 So. 2d 91 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    [3] By the same reasoning, Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), , cited by Defendant, is inapplicable to the present case.
  • Hickman v. Bates 889 So. 2d 1249 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    In re A.J.F., 00-0948 (La.6/30/00), ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Thompson v. Lee 888 So. 2d 300 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Jenkins v. Williamson-Butler 883 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), , 222 n. 21.
  • McCormick v. Allstate Insurance Co. 870 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    Leal [v. Dubois, 00-1285 (La.10/13/00) ], ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00); .
  • Howard McCormick, Indiv. v. Allstate Ins. Co. and Amy Romero La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    10/13/00)], Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00)
  • Miller v. Clout 857 So. 2d 458 La. 2003
    In re A.J.F., 00-0948 (La.6/30/00), ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • In Re Bolton 820 So. 2d 548 La. 2002
    See, e.g., In re A.J.F., 00-0948 (La.6/30/00), ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Connor v. Scroggs 821 So. 2d 542 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.02/25/00), .
  • Nugent v. Phelps 816 So. 2d 349 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Considering this language, the Louisiana Supreme Court in Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/2000), , stated that a party contesting an election no longer must show that "but for" the irregularity he would have won the election.
  • Louisiana Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Regal Ins. Co. 809 So. 2d 1280 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Leal, ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00); .
  • State Ex Rel. Jb 794 So. 2d 899 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Applying for Private Adoption, supra; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • State Ex Rel. IDH v. Thomas 787 So. 2d 526 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Applying for Private Adoption, supra ; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • State ex rel. J.B. 794 So. 2d 899 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Applying for Private Adoption, supra; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • McCullin v. US Agencies Cas. Ins. Co. 786 So. 2d 269 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Leal, supra; Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Hemavathy v. Shivashankara 782 So. 2d 115 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Crawford v. Reagan 779 So. 2d 1116 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • Leal v. Dubois 769 So. 2d 1182 La. 2000
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • In re A.J.F. 764 So. 2d 47 La. 2000
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .
  • In Re AJF 764 So. 2d 47 La. 2000
    Adkins v. Huckabay, 99-3605 (La.2/25/00), .