Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Breen v. Walters, 91 So. 50.
-
Malatesta v. Lowry
130 So. 2d 785
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1961
578 , ; Ciaccio v. Carbajal, 145 La.
-
Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. v. Excel Machine Works, Inc.
95 So. 2d 679
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
578 , , the plaintiff sustained a single skull fracture and was allowed only $1,000, but no application for an increase in the award' was made.
-
Norman v. State
69 So. 2d 120
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1954
578 , , the opinion of the Supreme Court contains this declaration: "The testimony is conflicting, but there is sufficient testimony, if accepted as true, to sustain the verdict of the jury, who are the exclusive judges of the credibility of the witnesses and of the weight and sufficiency of their testimony.
-
Roberts v. Radalec, Inc.
64 So. 2d 189
La. 1953
578 , , a suit relating to a trial by jury, the court said: “The trial judge gave his sanction to their verdict, after hearing the witness- ' es in the case, which necessarily adds weight to the presumption of its correctness.” In Rickerson v. Town of Minden, 127 La.
-
Crawford v. Magnolia
4 So. 2d 48
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
578 , , being three decisions of our Supreme Court.
-
Lambert v. Cire
179 So. 112
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
578 , , also relied upon by defendants, the injured party sustained a single fracture of the skull and $1,000 was allowed, but there no application for an increase was made by the plaintiff.
-
Tesoro v. Abate
173 So. 196
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
578 , ; Davis v. Hochfelder, 153 La.
-
Thomas v. Harman
170 So. 365
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
578 , ; Lasyone v. Zenoria Lumber Co., 163 La.
-
Hanover v. Brady
148 So. 267
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
586 , , Thompson v. Commercial National Bank, 156 La.
-
May v. Schepis
147 So. 717
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
578 , ; Landry v. Monteleone, 150 La.
-
Herbert v. Herrlitz
146 So. 65
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
578 , , in construing article 2716 and with particular reference to the contention that certain repairs enumerated in the last paragraph thereof should be made by tenants, the Supreme Court refused to hold that such repairs should have been made by the tenant in that case and said: “There is no testimony in the record t
-
Caulfield v. Saba
144 So. 907
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
578 , ; Boutte v. N. O. Terminal Co., 139 La.
- White v. Juge 142 So. 851 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
- Quatray v. Wicker 134 So. 313 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
-
Divas v. Noto
134 So. 275
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
578 , ; Brown v. Losch, 8 La.
-
Vanosby v. Creidman
131 So. 702
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
578 , ; Klein v. Young, supra.
-
Clark v. Greco
127 So. 647
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
578 , ; Landry vs. *661 Monteleone, 150 La.
- Price v. Florsheim 127 So. 22 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
- Viola v. Convery 122 So. 90 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
-
Lasyone v. Zenoria Lumber Co.
111 So. 670
La. 1927
578 , ; Schoppel v. Daly, 112 La.
-
Klein v. Young
111 So. 495
La. 1926
578 , ; Davis v. Hochfelder, 153 La.