Bailey v. LeBlanc

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Bailey v. LeBlanc

162 So. 3d 372, 2015 WL 992042

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided March 6, 2015·No. No. 2014-C-2594·Published

Opinion

CRICHTON, J.,

would grant and assigns reasons.

|Jt is ray opinion that the jury had a “reasonable factual basis” for its refusal to award damages for continued treatment of the plaintiffs neck and back, for the reasons explained in Judge Conery’s concurrence. Bailey v. LeBlanc, 2014-267 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/12/14), 151 So.3d 1004, 1014 (Conery, J., concurring). See also Stobart v. State Dep’t of Transp. and Dev., 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993) (appellate court may not set aside a jury’s finding of fact unless it finds that “a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding”). Because the jury had a reasonable factual basis for its determination, I believe the Court of Appeal was wrong to reverse on this issue.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CRICHTON, J.,

would grant and assigns reasons.

|Jt is ray opinion that the jury had a “reasonable factual basis” for its refusal to award damages for continued treatment of the plaintiffs neck and back, for the reasons explained in Judge Conery’s concurrence. Bailey v. LeBlanc, 2014-267 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/12/14), 151 So.3d 1004, 1014 (Conery, J., concurring). See also Stobart v. State Dep’t of Transp. and Dev., 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993) (appellate court may not set aside a jury’s finding of fact unless it finds that “a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding”). Because the jury had a reasonable factual basis for its determination, I believe the Court of Appeal was wrong to reverse on this issue.

Bailey v. LeBlanc, 162 So. 3d 372, 2015 WL 992042 (La. 2015).

Pincite

162 So. 3d 372 (Bailey v. LeBlanc) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related