Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Campbell v. DEPTARTMENT OF TRANSP. & DEV., 648 So. 2d 898.
-
Capone v. Ormet Corp.
822 So. 2d 684
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Graves v. Page, 96-2201, pp. 12-13 (La.11/7/97), ; Campbell v. Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development, 94-1052, pp. 5-6 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Petre v. State Ex Rel. DOTD
817 So. 2d 1107
La. 2002
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Vallien v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Transp. and Dev.
812 So. 2d 894
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), -02 ; Oster v. Department of Transp.
-
Fuselier v. Matranga
803 So. 2d 151
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
and Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Trahan v. Asphalt Associates, Inc.
800 So. 2d 18
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
Campbell v. Lousiana DOTD, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); ; Watson v. State Farm Fire and Cas.
-
Bridges v. FCS Entertainment
789 So. 2d 691
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
and Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Bonds v. ABBEVILLE GENERAL HOSP.
782 So. 2d 1188
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
and Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Lasyone v. Kansas City Southern RR
786 So. 2d 682
La. 2001
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), -02 ; Oster v. Department of Transp.
-
Snearl v. Mercer
780 So. 2d 563
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
48:21(A); Netecke v. State, Through DOTD, 98-1182, p. 7-8 (La.10/19/99), -95 ; Campbell v. Louisiana DOTD, 94-1052, p. 5-6 (La.1/17/95), -02 .
-
Odom v. City of Lake Charles
790 So. 2d 51
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); , the supreme court found that the failure of the DOTD to install guardrails on a bridge was a cause-in-fact of the accident which resulted in the death of a passenger after the driver of the automobile fell asleep and veered onto the shoulder and the automobile struck the bridge abutment on the opposite side of the r
-
Petre v. State Ex Rel. DOTD
775 So. 2d 1252
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Guilliams v. Succession of Harrel
774 So. 2d 325
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); ; Smith v. Travelers Ins.
-
Whitcraft v. State, Department of Transportation & Development
771 So. 2d 263
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), -02 .
-
Scott v. Pyles
770 So. 2d 492
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
& Dev., 94-1052, p. 7 (La.1/17/95), .
-
LeBlanc v. Stevenson
770 So. 2d 766
La. 2000
Campbell v. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95)
-
Fleming v. Hilton Hotels Corp.
774 So. 2d 174
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
and Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Ruttley v. Lee
761 So. 2d 777
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
and Development, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), ; LSA-R.S.
-
Gray v. State Ex Rel. DOTD
761 So. 2d 760
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
and Dev., 94-1052, p. 5 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Ford v. STATE, EX REL. DOTD
760 So. 2d 478
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
& Dev., 94-1052, p. 7 (La.1/17/95); ( citing Watson v. State Farm Fire and Cas.
-
Lee v. State
751 So. 2d 321
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Barsavage v. State, Through Department of Transportation and Development , 96-0688, at p. 9, 686 So.2d at 962 (quoting Campbell v. Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development, 94-1052 p. 5-6 (La.1/17/95), ).
-
Cole v. STATE EX REL. DOTD
755 So. 2d 315
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Cole v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development
755 So. 2d 315
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Ditch v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development
745 So. 2d 1279
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE DOTD: Campbell v. Louisiana DOTD, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), , at 901-02: “[2] [3] Next, we must determine whether DOTD was at fault.
-
Netecke v. State Ex Rel. DOTD
747 So. 2d 489
La. 1999
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), -02 ; Oster v. Department of Transp.
-
Courteaux v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Transp.
745 So. 2d 91
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
and Development, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), ; Bessard v. State, Dept. of Transp.
-
Cormier v. Comeaux
748 So. 2d 1123
La. 1999
& Development, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), -02 .
-
Edwards v. Daugherty
729 So. 2d 1112
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
& Development, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Cazes v. Parish of West Baton Rouge
744 So. 2d 54
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052, p. 5 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Haile v. City of Monroe
722 So. 2d 1192
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
9:2800; Lee v. State, Through DOTD, 97-0350 (La.10/21/97), ; Campbell v. State, Through DOTD, 94-1052 (La.01/17/95), ; Townsend v. Westinghouse Elevator Corporation, 25,966 (La.App.2d Cir.08/17/94), , writ denied, 94-2371 (La.11/29/94), .
-
Soileau v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP. AND DEV.
724 So. 2d 834
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); , advanced by the plaintiff in the argument above, indicates that the Louisiana Supreme Court clearly found that there may be multiple causes-in-fact in a tort suit.
-
Bell v. Ayio
731 So. 2d 893
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
See, e.g., Hill v. Morehouse Parish Police Jury, 95-1100 (La.1/16/96); (15-year old boy killed in car accident, father awarded $150,000 general damages); Campbell v. Department of Transportation and Development, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), (each parent awarded $150,000 general damages for death of son killed in car accident); 3-year old killed in pedestrian/bus accident, single mother awarded $150,000).
-
Dufrene v. Willingham
721 So. 2d 1026
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
and Development, and Hunter v. Department of Transp.
-
Deville v. Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development
719 So. 2d 584
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Ledoux v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation & Development
719 So. 2d 43
La. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Bowens v. Patterson
716 So. 2d 69
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); (75% fault to DOTD, 25% fault to driver); Rochelle v. State, Through Dept. of Transp.
-
Cormier v. Comeaux
714 So. 2d 943
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); ; Boutte v. Nissan Motor Corp., 94-1470 (La.App.
-
Caruthers v. State
711 So. 2d 420
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Jones v. Hawkins
708 So. 2d 749
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), ; Summerall v. Ouachita Parish School Bd., 27,643 (La.App.2d Cir. 12/8/95), .
- Brown v. Louisiana Indem. Co. 707 So. 2d 1240 La. 1998
- Hammons v. City of Tallulah 705 So. 2d 276 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
-
Odom v. Johnson
704 So. 2d 1254
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
& Dev., 94-1052 (La.1/17/95); .
-
Graves v. Page
703 So. 2d 566
La. 1997
1/17/95); -51 (La.1993); [3] The plaintiff must prove custody, defect and causation and DOTD must have knowledge of the hazardous condition.
- Thompson v. State 701 So. 2d 952 La. 1997
-
Shephard on Behalf of Shephard v. Scheeler
701 So. 2d 1308
La. 1997
Campbell v. DOTD, 94-1052 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Lee v. STATE, THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSP. AND DEV.
701 So. 2d 676
La. 1997
and Dev., 94-1052, p.5 (La.1/17/95), .
-
Whigham v. Boyd
700 So. 2d 1163
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
& Dev., 94-1052 p. 5 (La.1/17/96); (inter quotation marks omitted); See also Bessard v. State, Dept. of Transp.
-
Owens v. Concordia Elec. Co-Op., Inc.
699 So. 2d 434
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
Campbell, ; Boutte v. Nissan Motor Corp., 94-1470 (La.App.
-
Williams v. Dean
694 So. 2d 1195
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
1/17/95); ; Mathieu v. Imperial Toy Corporation, 94-0952, pp. 4-5 (La.
-
Nunn v. Financial Indemnity Co.
694 So. 2d 630
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
1/17/95), ; Vig v. City of Shreveport, 28,530 (La.App.
- Wilson v. City of New Orleans 693 So. 2d 344 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997