DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Owens v. Felder, 35 So. 2d 671.

24 citing documents.

  • Stanfield v. White 535 So. 2d 753 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • RO Roy & Company, Inc. v. a & W TRAILER SALES 277 So. 2d 204 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1973
  • Albritton v. Bossier City Hospital Commission 271 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1972
    1948) ; Barker v. Phoenix Insurance Company (La.App.2d Cir. 1969) ] The facts which are not contradicted will be set forth first.
  • Henson v. Travelers Insurance Company 228 So. 2d 667 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    `Where, in a proper analysis of the facts, an appellate court differs with the trial *670 court or jury, it is its duty to reverse the trial court.'" And in Owens v. Felder, La.App., , the position which an appellate court finds itself in was very adequately stated as follows: "We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive f
  • Barker v. Phoenix Insurance Company 220 So. 2d 720 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1969
    However, : "* * * it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison of the various portions of the transcribed record with other pertinent portions than it is to accurately observe and catalogue them while list
  • Twilbeck v. Twilbeck 192 So. 2d 907 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
    76 , ; Owens v. Felder, La.App., ; Barrett Division of Allied Chemicals and Dye Corp. v. Kennedy Sawmills Inc., 230 La.
  • Messana v. Allstate Insurance Company 182 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
  • American Fidelity Fire Insurance v. Southern Railway Co. 180 So. 2d 820 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    * * ’ ” , our predecessor, Court of Appeal, Parish of Orleans, discussed this question further, saying: “We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fa
  • Hayes v. Viola 179 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
    In Johnston v. Bearden, supra, and Dickinson v. City of Minden, supra, Judge Ayres, the Court's organ in both cases, (La.App.
  • Dickinson v. City of Minden 130 So. 2d 160 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
    In this connection, , wherein Judge Regan, as the author of the opinion, said: "We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies cont
  • Johnston v. Bearden 127 So. 2d 319 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
    In this connection, the position of an appellate court was properly stated by our brethren of the Orleans Court of Appeal, , wherein Judge Regan, as the author of the opinion, said, "We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies cont
  • Fruge v. White 125 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    1 Cir., ; Owens v. Felder, La.App.Orleans, .
  • State ex rel. Dupas v. City of New Orleans 125 So. 2d 375 La. 1960
    116 ; Owens v. Felder, La.App., .
  • Montgomery v. Walter Kellogg Lumber Co. 120 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    Not only is memory dulled by the lapse of time, but, , “ * * * it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison of the various portions of the transcribed record with other pertinent portions than it is to accurately observe and catalogue them while listening to the oral
  • Jones v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance 114 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
    at page 672 as follows : “We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison o
  • State ex rel. Dupas v. City of New Orleans 102 So. 2d 77 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1958
    is quite apropos here: “We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a compariso
  • Higginbotham v. Frazier 92 So. 2d 89 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    I , in which they stated: "We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison
  • Jacobs v. Landry 82 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    In the case of Anderson v. Morgan City Canning Co., Inc., La.App., , we quoted from the case of Owens v. Felder, La.App., , as follows: “ We are reluctant to reverse the " finding of a trial court" based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison of the var
  • Boudreaux v. Moreau 73 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    App., , 672 in which we made this pertinent observation: "We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the
  • Anderson v. Morgan City Canning Co. 73 So. 2d 196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    But after a careful analysis of the evidence, we readily conclude that reversible manifest error does appear in the judgment before us. It is fitting to here quote what we said in Owens v. Felder, La.App., , 672: "We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occassionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a compar
  • Murphy v. Checker Cab Co. of New Orleans 59 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    What we said in Owens v. Felder, La.App., , is apropos here: ' “We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison of
  • Moreau v. McGehee 44 So. 2d 833 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
    we said: — “We are reluctant to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison of the var
  • Ebert v. Pacific Nat. Fire Ins. Co. 40 So. 2d 40 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
    App., , 672, that: "We are reluctant *Page 47 to reverse the finding of a trial court based primarily on questions of fact, but in a case, such as we are presently analyzing, it is a self evident principle that it is occasionally easier to perceive fallacies and inconsistencies contained in the record by a comparison of the
  • Pittman v. Robinson 37 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948