DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Trahan v. Lantier, 33 So. 2d 139.

15 citing documents.

  • Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Texas 209 So. 2d 561 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
    In Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., , the Louisiana Court of Appeals quoted with approval from an earlier decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court, Barnhill v. Texas & P. R. Co., 109 La.
  • Mediamolle v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad 169 So. 2d 235 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    In this same connection see Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., , Alanza v. Texas & P. Ry.
  • Davis-Delcambre Motors, Inc. v. Simon 163 So. 2d 553 La. 1964
    131 ; Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Short v. Central Louisiana Electric Co., Inc., La.App., .
  • Hymel v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad Company 145 So. 2d 138 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
    Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Barnhill v. Texas & P. Ry.
  • Rico v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad 140 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    710 ; Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Brown v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co., 42 La.Ann.
  • Renz v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company 138 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
    1947, ; Calvert Fire Insurance Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App.1951, ; Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494 .
  • Gray v. Illinois Central Railroad Company 132 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    In this same connection see Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., , Alanza v. Texas & P. Ry.
  • Simon v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad Company 124 So. 2d 646 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
    1947, ; Calvert Fire Insurance Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App.1951, ; Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494 .
  • Klaus v. Southern Railway Co. 107 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    1947, .” We repeat, however, that whether the signals were given is of no importance when we consider the abundant evidence to the effect that the young boy was attempting to board the train and “hop” a ride and that this took place after .the greater portion of the train had already passed him.
  • Bergeron v. Greyhound Corporation 100 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
  • Wilson v. Williams 82 So. 2d 71 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    Most favorably construed to defendants, this testimony would absolve their driver of any negligence whatsoever contributing to the accident, since being on the superior street he was under no duty to expect the other car to neglect its statutory duty and his right of way and to proceed immediately into his path, McMorris v. Webb, La.App., 1 Cir., ; Trahan v. Lantier, La.App., 1 Cir., .
  • Leger v. Texas & P. R. Co. 67 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    In one, Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., LaApp., , the Court said: “In ’ commenting on the negative testimony of plaintiff’s witnesses, who reside near the tracks, Judge Fruge very aptly quoted from the case of Handy v. New Orleans Public Service, 10 La.App.
  • Calvert Fire Ins. Co. v. Texas & P. Ry. Co. 55 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
    160 ; Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., ; Stelly v. N. O. & Texas Ry.
  • Stelly v. Texas & NOR Co. 49 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
    Quoting from Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., , 143: "`The greater the difficulty of seeing and hearing the train as he approaches the crossing, the greater caution the law imposes upon the traveler.'
  • Bordenave v. Texas & New Orleans R. Co. 46 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950