Gibson v. Roberts

8 Citing cases

  1. Smith v. Willard

    711 So. 2d 723 (La. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 4 times

    This Court reviews summary judgments de novo under the same criteria as the district court. Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454, p. 2 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97), 701 So.2d 501, 503. Summary judgment is favored and shall be construed to accomplish that end.

  2. Pertuit v. Tenant La. H.

    49 So. 3d 932 (La. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 4 times

    We review a district court's grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same criteria that govern the district court's consideration of whether summary judgment is appropriate. Costello v. Hardy, 03-1146, p. 8 (La.1/21/04), 864 So.2d 129, 137; Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454, p. 2 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97), 701 So.2d 501, 503. The only issue before this court is whether the trial court erred in granting the Pertuits' motion for summary judgment on their claim that Dr. Boudreaux failed to obtain the decedent's informed consent prior to proceeding with the exploratory surgery.

  3. Fenner v. Desalvo

    826 So. 2d 39 (La. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 6 times

    In determining whether or not an attorney has committed malpractice, the court must look at the conditions existing at the time of the alleged malpractice. Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97), 701 So.2d 501, 503. An attorney is obligated to exercise at least that degree of care, skill, and diligence which a prudent practicing attorney in his locality exercises.

  4. Dorion v. 1111 Building

    737 So. 2d 878 (La. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 6 times
    In Dorion, the court found that a "landlord is not entitled to the exculpatory benefits of La. R.S. 9:3221" for defects to common areas.

    La.C.C.P. art. 966, as amended by Act 483 of 1997, legislatively overruled the jurisprudential presumption against summary judgment. In Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97); 701 So.2d 501, 503, this court noted:. . . the movant's burden does not require him to negate all essential elements of the adverse party's claim, but rather to point out to the court that there is an absence of factual support for one or more elements essential to the adverse party's claim, action or defense.

  5. Zamanian v. Christian Health

    715 So. 2d 57 (La. Ct. App. 1998)

    Appellate courts review summary judgments de novo under the same criteria used by the district court. Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97), 701 So.2d 501. Summary judgment is now favored. La.C.C.P. art. 966 C as amended by Act 483 of 1997 provides:

  6. Cox v. Board of Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund

    716 So. 2d 441 (La. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 6 times
    Observing that "[n]o expert testimony reveals that alternatives to the surgery existed, other than perhaps no surgery" and finding summary judgment appropriate

    This court reviews summary judgments de novo under the same criteria as the district court. Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454, p. 2 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97), 701 So.2d 501, 503. Summary judgment is favored and shall be construed to secure a just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of the action.

  7. Succ., Harvey v. Dietzen

    716 So. 2d 911 (La. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 28 times

    LSA-C.C.P. art. 966(B). In Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97); 701 So.2d 501, this court reviewed La.C.C.P. art. 966, as amended by Act 483 of 1997, which legislatively overruled the jurisprudential presumption against summary judgment. Noting that summary judgment is favored, this court stated:

  8. Motton v. Lockheed Martin

    703 So. 2d 202 (La. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 11 times
    Discussing summary judgment in light of recent amendments to Article 966

    Because Article 966 C(2) simply illuminates the burdens of production of the parties in a summary judgment context, the 1997 amendment may be applied retroactively. See Kaufmann v. Fleet Tire Service of La., Inc., 97-1428 (La. 9/5/97), 699 So.2d 75; Gibson v. Roberts, 97-0454 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/15/97), 701 So.2d 501; see also Young v. Dupre Transport Co., 97-0591 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/1/97), 700 So.2d 1156.