DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Finkelstein v. Naihaus, 151 So. 686.

18 citing documents.

  • Morneau v. American Oil Company 272 So. 2d 313 La. 1973
  • Simms v. D'Avillier 179 So. 2d 707 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    Oubre v. Judice, La.App., ; Hall v. White, La.App., ; Haydel v. Bullinger, La.App., ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., .
  • Baughman v. Wells 171 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    * * * 0 * * * “'(6) The rule has also been stated to be that one who provokes a difficulty by insults, abuse, threats, or other conduct well calculated to arouse the resentment or fear of another cannot recover for an assault by the latter.— Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., ; Guillory v. Fontenot, 2 La.App.
  • Wells v. Perkins 101 So. 2d 740 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    627 ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., .
  • Purnell v. Jackson 91 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
    704 ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., ; Jumonville v. Frey’s, Inc., La.App., 173 So.
  • Smith v. Bankston 75 So. 2d 880 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    704 ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., ; Jumonville v. Freys, Inc., La.App., 173 So.
  • Brown v. Lambert 71 So. 2d 410 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    Finkelstein v. Nailhaus, La.App., ; Walsh v. Schriner, La.App., 168 So.
  • Gordon v. Pittman 61 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    662 ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., ; Landry v. Himel, La.App., 176 So.
  • Smith v. Parker 59 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1952
    See Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., 1933, ; Walsh v. Schriner, La.App., 1936, 168 So.
  • Esnault v. Richard 53 So. 2d 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
    662 ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., ; Landry v. Himel, La.
  • Britt v. Merritt 45 So. 2d 902 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1950
    App., ; Finkelstein v. Naihaus, La.App., .
  • Chisholm v. De Frances 27 So. 2d 467 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
    App., ; Landry v. Himel, La.
  • Gross v. Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Co. 25 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
    App., ; Guillory v. Fontenot, 2 La.
  • Ponthieu v. Coco 18 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1944
    He cites a more recent decision of the Louisiana Circuit Court of Appeal, , and other authorities which the Court deems unnecessary to recite.
  • Aetna Casualty Surety Co. v. Cazebon 11 So. 2d 118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    In cases of this character the rule is, as was declared by Justice Higgins, when a member of this Court, , 688: "* * * where plaintiff provokes a difficulty by insults, abuse, threats, or other conduct well calculated to arouse the resentment or fears of the defendant, plaintiff is not entitled to recover.
  • Landry v. Himel 176 So. 627 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
    Walsh v. Schriner (La.App.)
  • Jumonville v. Frey's, Inc. 173 So. 227 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
    it was held: “We believe, as did our learned brother below, that Mrs. Finkelstein was the aggressor and, therefore, plaintiffs cannot recover, for the law is clear that, where plaintiff provokes a difficulty by insults, abuse, threats, or other conduct well calculated to arouse the resentment or fears of the de
  • Walsh v. Schriner 168 So. 345 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    In Finkelstein et al. v. Naihaus et al. (La.App.1933) , the court said: “We believe, as did our learned brother below, that' Mrs. Finkelstein was the aggressor, and, therefore, plaintiffs cannot recover, for the law is clear that, where plaintiff provokes a difficulty by insults, abuse, threats, or other conduct well calculated to arouse the resentment or fears of t