DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ecklund v. Tenneco Oil Co., 488 So. 2d 679.

34 citing documents.

  • Cousins v. Realty Ventures, Inc. 844 So. 2d 860 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc.
  • Adams v. Canal Indemnity Co. 760 So. 2d 1197 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    1 Cir.1985), writ granted and rev'd in part on other grounds, delineates the proper use of prior claims evidence at trial and notes the difficulty of determining when such evidence should or should not be allowed: [T]he need for the exposure of fraudulent claims comes in conflict with the need for the protection of innocent litigants from unfair prejudice.
  • Dragon v. Cooper/T. Smith Stevedoring 726 So. 2d 1006 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
    In Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: *1010 When congress is silent on a particular question, there is no bar to application of a state statute to its own citizens on the high seas.
  • Williamson v. Haynes Best Western 688 So. 2d 1201 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
    1 Cir.1985), writ granted in part, the court held that the trial court has discretion to balance probative value against prejudice, and to admit such evidence only when the proponent has produced or will produce other evidence of fraud.
  • Milstead v. Diamond M Offshore, Inc. 676 So. 2d 89 La. 1996
    This Court's decision in Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., reflected the importance of such considerations as they concern the applicable scope of review in state maritime cases.
  • Brown v. Diamond Shamrock, Inc. 671 So. 2d 1049 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
    1 Cir.1985), writ granted in part on other grounds, in which the first circuit held that the use of prior claims requires a showing of fraud on the part of the plaintiff or a similarity in the accidents.
  • Foster v. Destin Trading Corp. 670 So. 2d 1342 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
    In Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., our supreme court held that in these cases the procedural law of Louisiana controls as to the scope of appellate review.
  • Milstead v. Diamond M Offshore, Inc. 663 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
    the Louisiana Supreme Court was asked to consider whether Louisiana law or federal law governed the scope of appellate review with respect to jury verdicts in an Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) case.
  • Simon v. Fasig-Tipton Co. 652 So. 2d 1351 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
  • Strawder v. Zapata Haynie Corp. 649 So. 2d 554 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    LAW Standard of Review In Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., the Supreme Court noted that "state courts are not required to apply Rule 52(a)—a rule of federal civil procedure [the clearly erroneous standard of review]—to their own appellate system for reviewing factual determinations of trial courts," citing Icicle Seafoods, Inc. v. Worthington, 475 U.S. 709 , 106 S.
  • Mayo v. Nissan Motor Corp. 639 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    See also Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., a maritime tort case, in which the court explained that Louisiana substantive law controls except where it conflicts with federal law.
  • Cormier v. Cliff's Drilling Co. 640 So. 2d 552 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    However, in Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., our supreme court held that in these cases the procedural law of Louisiana controls as to the scope of appellate review.
  • Butler v. Zapata Haynie Corp. 633 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc.
  • Gaston v. G & D Marine Services, Inc. 631 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
    3020 , 125 L.Ed.2d 709 (1993); Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., (La.
  • Ronquillo v. Belle Chase Marine Transp. 629 So. 2d 1359 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    1st Cir.1985), writ granted, on remand (La.App.
  • Seymour v. Cigna Insurance Co. 622 So. 2d 839 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    1st Cir.1987), writ denied citing Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., and Trahan v. Gulf Crews, Inc., 260 La.
  • Jordan v. Intercontinental Bulktank Corp. 621 So. 2d 1141 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    1527 , 89 L.Ed.2d 739 (1986)
  • Mistich v. Pipelines, Inc. 609 So. 2d 921 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., Thezan v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 708 F.2d 175 (5th Cir.1983), cert.
  • Green v. Industrial Helicopters, Inc. 593 So. 2d 634 La. 1992
    In Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., we stated: When congress is silent on a particular question, there is no bar to application of a state statute to its own citizens on the high seas.
  • Petitto v. McMichael 588 So. 2d 1144 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    where the supreme court reversed appellate decisions which were remanded for new trials.
  • Hanks v. Barge Transport Co., Inc. 563 So. 2d 1297 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
    See also Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc.
  • Bergeron v. Main Iron Works, Inc. 563 So. 2d 954 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    1527 , 89 L.Ed.2d 739 (1986); Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., Simmons v. Hope Contractors, Inc., (La.App.
  • Osorio v. Waterman SS Corp. 557 So. 2d 999 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    *1004 However, in a per curiam opinion in Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., our Supreme Court recognized the two different Federal standards of review in maritime cases.
  • Feyerabend v. State, Dept. of Wildlife & Fisheries 544 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., (La.
  • Neff v. Rose 546 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc.
  • Prince v. Conoco, Inc. 529 So. 2d 39 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    1st Cir.1985), writ granted in part, denied in part, remanded, rehearing den.
  • McDonald v. McDonald 516 So. 2d 1306 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc.
  • Simmons v. Hope Contractors, Inc. 517 So. 2d 333 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    See Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc.
  • Bennett v. Sedco Maritime 520 So. 2d 894 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
    See also Thezan v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 708 F.2d 175 (5th Cir.1983); Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., (La.
  • Noe v. Radcliff Materials, Inc. 510 So. 2d 69 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., Trahan v. Gulf Crews, Inc., 260 La.
  • Reine v. Grillot 505 So. 2d 1179 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
  • Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc. 500 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    SUPREME COURT ACTION In Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc., the Supreme Court held this court was in error as to the determination of the scope of appellate review, and thus remanded to this court for a decision on the appeal.
  • Sledge v. La. Dept. of Transp. & Development 492 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    See also Robert S. Daigle, et al. v. Coastal Marine, Inc., et al
  • Daigle v. Coastal Marine, Inc. 489 So. 2d 912 La. 1986
    In re Robert S. Daigle, applying for rehearing of this Court’s Order of May 12, 1986, ; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA-84-1187; Parish of St.