Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Green v. K-Mart Corp., 794 So. 2d 794.

41 citing documents.

Jesse Justin Colvin and Ruby Sue Hill Colvin v. Robert Bradford Jones and Roni Michelle Reppond Jones Consolidated … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2026
Phillip Hebert and Brian Hebert v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Cnh Industrial … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
6/22/01), this court stated: Prescription runs from the time that the plaintiff has actual or constructive knowledge of the act, which has been defined as “the time at which the plaintiff has information sufficient to excite attention and prompt further inquiry.” National Council on Compensation Ins.
Katie King Alston v. Betty Jean Moore La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
1026 Conti Holding, LLC v. 1025 Bienville, LLC La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
2 Cir. 4/4/01), writ denied, 01-1354 (La.6/22/01), ).
LARRY BIZE, SR. AND v. VERSUS La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
Pinola Preserve, L.L.C. v. Star B Ranch, L.L.C. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2021
6/22/01), citing Pace v. Towns, 33,071 (La.
Frith Farms DeSoto Parish Interest Partnership, L.L.P. v. James W. Lee La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
Franks Inv. Co. v. Shaw 268 So. 3d 1210 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
Mary O'neal v. Ronnie Newcomb La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
O'Neal v. Newcomb 209 So. 3d 1039 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Gloria M. Ned v. Union Pacific Railroad Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
6/22/01), (quoting Simmons v. Templeton, 97-2349, 98-43, pp. 3-4 (La.App.
Ned v. Union Pacific Corp. 176 So. 3d 1095 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
3 Cir. 4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), (quoting Simmons v. Templeton, 97-2349, 98-43, pp. 3-4 (La.App.
Luffey Timber Co., LLC v. Florence 106 So. 3d 596 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
Bowman v. Blankenship, 34,558 (La.App.2d Cir.04/04/01), , writ denied, 01-1354 (La.06/22/01), .
City of Breaux Bridge v. Charles Thibodeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 4/4/01), writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), ]
George McCarthy v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
6/22/01), : [The plaintiffs] admit that they filed their action after the prescriptive period but argue that the general rules of prescription do not apply to their claims because they were effectively barred from enforcing their rights for reasons beyond their own will.
McCarthy v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc. 82 So. 3d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 4/4/01), -95 , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), : [The plaintiffs] admit that they filed their action after the prescriptive period but argue that the general rules of prescription do not apply to their claims because they were effectively barred from enforcing their rights for reasons beyond their own will.
Grieshaber Family Properties, LLC v. Impatiens, Inc. 63 So. 3d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
2 Cir.4/4/01), , unit denied, 01-1354 (La.6/22/01), ).
Cathy Lynn Porter Bennett v. T. Barrett Porter La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Bennett v. Porter 58 So. 3d 663 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 4/4/01) , , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), .
Bennie L. Coker v. Town of Glenmora, Louisiana La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
Coker v. TOWN OF GLENMORA 37 So. 3d 532 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
3 Cir. 4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), .]
Holley Homestead Trust v. Harrison 11 So. 3d 511 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
2d Cir.4/4/01), , writ denied, 2001-1354 (La.6/22/01), .
Brunson v. Hemler 989 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
2d Cir.4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1354 (La.6/22/01), .
Richard Hargett v. Estate of Daniel N. Hargett, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
3 Cir. 4/4/01), writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), Matthews v. Sun Exploration & Prod.
Hargett v. ESTATE OF HARGETT 977 So. 2d 311 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
3 Cir. 4/4/01) , , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), ; Matthews v. Sun Exploration & Prod.
Garner v. Holley 968 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Bowman v. Blankenship, 34,558 (La.App.2d Cir.04/04/01), , writ denied, 01-1354 (La.06/22/01), ; Pace v. Towns, 33,071 (La.
Greengrove Missionary Baptist Church v. Cox 966 So. 2d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
App. 2d Cir.4/4/01), , writ denied, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/22/01), .
Alphonse Williams v. Pioneer Fishing & Rental Tools, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
6/22/01), (wherein a panel of this court noted that a plaintiff who has information sufficient to excite attention and prompt further inquiry is deemed to have constructive knowledge sufficient to commence a prescriptive period.
Williams v. PIONEER FISHING & RENTAL TOOLS 945 So. 2d 936 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
App. 3 Cir. 4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), (wherein a panel of this court noted that a plaintiff who has information sufficient to excite attention and prompt further inquiry is deemed to have constructive knowledge sufficient to commence a prescriptive period.
Travis Lee Stevens v. Darren Keith Bruce La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
6/22/01), we stated with regard to contra non valentum: According to this theory, prescription does not begin to run until “a plaintiff either knew or should have known of a cause of action, even if that knowledge does not occur until long after the wrongful conduct at issue has occurred.” Simmons v. T
Stevens v. Bruce 878 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
3 Cir. 4/4/01), -95 , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), , we stated with regard to contra non valentum: According to this theory, prescription does not begin to run until "a plaintiff either knew or should have known of a cause of action, even if that knowledge does not occur until long after the wrongful conduct at issue has occurred."
Smith v. State Department of Transportation & Development 872 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
3 Cir. 4/4/01) , , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), ; Poirrier v. Otis Eng’g Corp., (La.App.
Smith v. STATE, DEP. OF TRANS. & DEVELOP. 872 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
3 Cir. 4/4/01) , , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), ; (La.App.
Ken Smith D/B/A B & K Music v. State of Louisiana, Dept. of Transportation & Develop. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Cecil Brooking & Elizabeth Brooking v. Victor P. Vegas & Betty Rives Vegas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
6/22/01), the second circuit agreed with the trial court that the act of bulldozing a fence interrupted the defendants’ possession for the purposes of acquisitive prescription.
Brooking v. Vegas 866 So. 2d 370 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
App. 2 Cir. 4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1354 (La.6/22/01), , the second circuit agreed with the trial court that the act of bulldozing a fence interrupted the defendants' possession *374 for the purposes of acquisitive prescription.
Mary L. Brown v. Avoyelles Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
6/22/01), (quoting Wimberly v. Gatch, 93-2361, p. 4 (La.
Brown v. Avoyelles Parish School Bd. 861 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
3 Cir. 4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), (quoting Wimberly v. Gatch, 93-2361, p. 4 (La.4/11/94), ).
Secret Cove, LLC v. Thomas 862 So. 2d 1010 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
2nd Cir.4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1354 (La.6/22/01), .
Amoco Production Co. v. Texaco, Inc. 838 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
3 Cir. 4/4/01) , , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), ; Matthews v. Sun Exploration & Prod.
Hudson v. JACKSON PARISH SCHOOL BD. 811 So. 2d 212 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
3d Cir.4/4/01), , writ denied, 01-1346 (La.6/22/01), .