Miceli v. American Tobacco Co.

691 So. 2d 290, 96 La.App. 1 Cir. 1135, 1997 La. App. LEXIS 858, 1997 WL 158125
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miceli v. American Tobacco Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 94 La.App. 1 Cir. 0351
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided March 27, 1997·No. No. 96 CA 1135·Published

Opinion

LOTTINGER, Chief Judge.

For the reasons assigned in Mary Ruth Ford Miceli v. Armstrong World Industries; Celotex Corporation; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; Keene Corporation; Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation; Owens-Illinois, Inc; Pittsburgh Corning Corporation; Rockwool Manufacturing Company; GAF Corporation; American Tobacco Company; Lorillard, Inc. and Liggett Group, Inc., No. 96 CA 1134, 691 So.2d 283, decided this date, the summary judgment granted by the trial court in favor of defendants is hereby reversed, and this matter is remanded for further proceedings. All costs associated with this appeal are assessed against defendants. REVERSED AND REMANDED.

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

Miceli v. American Tobacco Co., 691 So. 2d 290, 96 La.App. 1 Cir. 1135, 1997 La. App. LEXIS 858, 1997 WL 158125 (La. Ct. App. 1997).

691 So. 2d 290 (Miceli v. American Tobacco Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Miceli v. Armstrong World Industries
691 So. 2d 283 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1997)