Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Bates v. City of New Orleans, 137 So. 3d 774.

17 citing documents.

Darre Finney and Glenda Marie Smith v. the Board of Commissioners of the Port of New Orleans, M/V … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2026
App. 4 Cir. 3/26/14), : • “Article 1951 contemplates the correction of a ‘clerical error’ in a final judgment, but does not authorize substantive amendments.” An amendment that “adds to, subtracts from, or in any way affects the substance of a judgment, is considered a substantive amendment.” 6 There is
Coastal Fire Protection, LLC v. Tsm Investments, LLC La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 03/26/14), ), “[t]he jurisprudence has construed the catch-all phrase in Article 2088--all matters ‘not reviewable under the appeal’--to mean that the trial court retains jurisdiction over all issues that are ‘unaffected by the appeal,’ even issues not specifically enumerated in La.
Evangelia Bilalis v. Wallace Drennan and Zurich American Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
Scott Vicknair, LLC v. Wayne Robinson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 3/26/14), (internal citations omitted), outlined the following well-settled parameters regarding a court's authority to amend a final judgment: • “Article 1951 contemplates the correction of a ‘clerical error’ in a final judgment, but does not authorize substantive amendments” An amendment that “ad
Lirette Neville, Individually and on Behalf of Her Late Son, Tristen Edgerson (D) v. Lcmc Health Holdings, Inc. … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
Lisa Leflore v. Valero Refining-Mereaux, LLC La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
App. 4 Cir. 3/26/14), (citing McGee v. Wilkinson, 03-1178, p. 4 (La.
Brittany and Jamar Waiters v. Renee E. Deville La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
App. 4 Cir. 03/26/14), (citing, French Market Vendors Ass’n, Inc. v. French Market Corp., 12- 0964, p. 15 (La.
Crown Pine Timber 4, Lp v. Crosby Land & Resources, L.L.C. F/K/A Crosby Chemicals, Inc. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
4 Cir. 3/26/14), (citing Dufrene v. Willingham, 1999-1153, p. 5 (La.App.
Caruso v. Chalmette Refining, LLC 222 So. 3d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Davis v. Nola Home Construction, L.L.C. 222 So. 3d 833 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 3/26/14), ; Allvend, 00-0661 at p. 6, 804 So.2d at 30 .
Boes Iron Works, Inc. v. Gee Cee Group, Inc. 206 So. 3d 938 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
App. 4 Cir. 3/26/14), , the following: This court reviews a trial court’s factual findings under a manifest error standard.
Freeman v. Zara's Food Store, Inc. 204 So. 3d 691 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 3/26/14), (quoting Durio v. Horace Mann Ins.
Condon v. Logan 190 So. 3d 778 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Rousset v. Smith 176 So. 3d 632 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Medical Review Panel Proceedings for the Claim of Johnson v. Tulane University Hospital & Clinic 174 So. 3d 91 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 3/26/14), (citing Palmer v. Leclercq, 2007-0604, p. 6 (La.App.
Daniel Hyatt v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 3/26/14), the issues involved computation of benefits available to the plaintiffs under different statutory schemes.
Hyatt v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. 149 So. 3d 406 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 3/26/14) , , the issues involved computation of benefits available to the plaintiffs under different statutory schemes.