Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Searcy v. Novo, 188 So. 490.
- Willard O. Lape, III v. Thomas Adair Brown and Thomas Costanza La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
- Willie J. Zeno, Sr. v. Charles J. Foret La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Jane Doe v. Scott M. Hawkins La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Doe v. Hawkins 42 So. 3d 1000 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
-
Teague v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co.
974 So. 2d 1266
La. 2008
Scheffler, 06-1774 at p. 13, 950 So.2d at 651 , (La.App.
- Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLP 950 So. 2d 641 La. 2007
- Succession of Crowe v. Henry 602 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
-
Soderquist v. Kramer
595 So. 2d 825
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
cited with approval in Plaquemines Parish, supra .
-
Vidrine v. Abshire
558 So. 2d 288
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
attorney and his client, “will be closely scrutinized by the courts, and if it appears that the attorney did not fully inform his client of all phases of the transaction and its full meaning and import, and any disadvantages that might result to the client, the courts will not hesitate to set aside the transaction.” Also relevant in this regard is the Second Circuit’s (La.App.
- Plaquemines Par. Com'n Council v. Delta Dev. Co. 502 So. 2d 1034 La. 1987
- Boisdore v. Bridgeman 502 So. 2d 1149 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
- Minor v. Robertson 461 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
- Marshall v. Wells 381 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
-
Cattle Farms, Inc. v. Abercrombie
211 So. 2d 354
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1968
at 498 , the Court stated: "The law leaves no uncertainty in defining the character of duty which an attorney owes to his client.
-
Delta Equipment and Constr. Co. v. Royal Indem. Co.
186 So. 2d 454
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
App., , in support of the principle that a high degree of care is owed a client by an attorney.
-
Agregaard v. Skrmetta
131 So. 2d 363
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1961
verbo Attorneys at Law, Sections 48 et seq.; and in the Louisiana cases, Searcy v. Novo, La.App., , and Matthews v. Spears, La.App., .