Masters v. Courtesy Ford Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Masters v. Courtesy Ford Co.

765 So. 2d 1055, 2000 La. LEXIS 2138, 2000 WL 968911

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJune 30, 2000

DocketNo. 2000-C-1330

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 765 So. 2d 1055 (Masters v. Courtesy Ford Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Masters v. Courtesy Ford Co., 765 So. 2d 1055, 2000 La. LEXIS 2138, 2000 WL 968911 (La. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Ford Motor Co.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Union, 3rd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 30,152; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 32,275-CA.

Granted. Although the court of appeal correctly found the district court erred in excluding Randy Rainwater’s statement, the court of appeal erred in conducting a de novo review of the record in this case, where a view of the witnesses is essential to a fair resolution of conflicting evidence. See Jones v. Black, 95-2530 (La.6/28/96), 676 So.2d 1067; Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Ins. Co., 388 So.2d 707 (La.1980). Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal on rehearing is vacated, and the case is remanded to the district court for a new trial, at which time the statement of Mr. Rainwater should be admitted.

KNOLL, J., not on panel.

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

In re Ford Motor Co.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Union, 3rd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 30,152; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 32,275-CA.

Granted. Although the court of appeal correctly found the district court erred in excluding Randy Rainwater’s statement, the court of appeal erred in conducting a de novo review of the record in this case, where a view of the witnesses is essential to a fair resolution of conflicting evidence. See Jones v. Black, 95-2530 (La.6/28/96), 676 So.2d 1067; Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Ins. Co., 388 So.2d 707 (La.1980). Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal on rehearing is vacated, and the case is remanded to the district court for a new trial, at which time the statement of Mr. Rainwater should be admitted.

KNOLL, J., not on panel.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

765 So. 2d 1055, 2000 La. LEXIS 2138, 2000 WL 968911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/masters-v-courtesy-ford-co-la-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack