DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, 503 So. 2d 576.

26 citing documents.

  • Pierre v. Louisiana S.W. Transportation, Inc. 14 So. 3d 593 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2009
    The affidavit must affirmatively establish that the affiant is competent to testify to the matter stated by a factual averment showing how he came by such knowledge.” Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Delcambre v. Price 738 So. 2d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    4 Cir. 3/27/96); ; Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Duplessis v. Warren Petroleum, Inc. 672 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Robinson v. Yousuf 668 So. 2d 436 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Pape v. Odeco, Inc. 643 So. 2d 229 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
    art. 966 B; Barham & (La.App.
  • Gray v. FeBornstein 642 So. 2d 245 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    art. 966B; Barham & (La.App.
  • Williams v. Trapolin Law Firm 641 So. 2d 673 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
    art. 966 B; Barham & (La.App.
  • Hartman v. Applewhite 637 So. 2d 1164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    art. 966B; Barham & (La.App.
  • Raine v. CECO CORP. 627 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    art. 966 B; Barham & (La.
  • Kantack v. Progressive Ins. Co. 618 So. 2d 494 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    art. 966B; Barham & (La.
  • Armstrong v. Hanover Ins. Co. 614 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    art. 966 B; Barham & (La.App.
  • SOUTH CENT. BELL TELEPHONE v. Rouse Co. 590 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Urbeso v. Bryan 583 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
    art. 966; Barham & (La.App.
  • Urbeso v. Bryan 583 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    art. 966; Barham & (La.App.
  • Tolmas v. Weichert 572 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    Art. 967; Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Morcos v. EMS, INC. 570 So. 2d 69 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    Art. 967; Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Hines v. Bick 566 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Roberts v. Louisiana Coca-Cola Bottling Co. 566 So. 2d 163 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    Art. 967; Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • O'ROURKE v. Hilton Hotels Corp. 560 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Duplessis Cadillac, Inc. v. CREATIVE CR. SERV. 564 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Roger v. Dufrene 553 So. 2d 1106 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Bordelon v. Jackson 542 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Drake Concrete Co. of Belle Chasse v. Buffman, Inc. 535 So. 2d 26 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    On an action for amounts due on an open account, this court found summary judgment inappropriate where, “[t]he intent of [the parties] to personally assume liability (there is nothing in writing) is at issue.” Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Causey v. Perez 514 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    SUMMARY JUDGMENT The law on summary judgments is well established and has recently been stated by this court in Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • France v. American Bank 505 So. 2d 1175 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
    Article 967; See also, Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates, (La.App.
  • Barham & Churchill v. Campbell & Associates 503 So. 2d 1018 La. 1987
    *1019 Prior report: La.App., .