DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Guidry v. Anderson-Dunham, Inc., 606 So. 2d 780.

15 citing documents.

  • La. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. Burkett 266 So. 3d 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
  • Dunn v. Terry 821 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • Hall v. Zen-Noh Grain Corp. 777 So. 2d 523 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
    (fn.10), the Court noted that the 1987 change was a substantive change in the law, and thus, should be given prospective application.
  • Hall v. Zen-Noh Grain Corp. 769 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
    (fn.10), the Court noted that the 1987 change was a substantive change in the law, and thus, should be given prospective application.
  • Ford v. STATE, EX REL. DOTD 760 So. 2d 478 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    the supreme court held that this language "provides that whenever a UM insurer makes payment to an insured for bodily injuries, the insurer is entitled to recover against ` any person or organization legally responsible ' for the bodily injury for which such payment is made."
  • Coleman v. Acromed Corp. 764 So. 2d 81 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    [5] In exploring the solidary relationship of tortfeasors where damage arises from separate theories of recovery, as in the case subjudice, to be supportive.
  • STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. v. Berthelot 732 So. 2d 1230 La. 1999
  • State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Berthelot 732 So. 2d 1230 La. 1999
  • Detillier v. Sullivan 714 So. 2d 244 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
    This runs afoul, Ms. Detillier believes, wherein the Court stated at page 784: "If the UM insurer pays only part of the obligation, such as when it pays to its policy limits which are less than the total amount of damages, it is partially subrogated to the insured's rights ...
  • Jones v. Hawkins 708 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
  • State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Nathan 673 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • Rizer v. American Sur. & Fid. Ins. Co. 669 So. 2d 387 La. 1996
    Further, in discussing the subrogation rights of the uninsured motorist carrier against a non-motorist tortfeasor, the trial court found that the tortfeasor, its insurer and the uninsured motorist carrier were liable in solido for plaintiff's damages, and were thus obliged to do the same thing, "that is, to fac
  • Futch v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. 654 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
  • Collins v. Estrade 638 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
  • Steptoe v. Lallie Kemp Hosp. 634 So. 2d 331 La. 1994