Lobell v. Rosenberg
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
| tThis civil appeal is before us on remand from the Louisiana Supreme Court.1
In light of the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the trial judge did not err'when he terminated the lease, we have, in connection with its directive, reviewed the parties’ arguments with respect to Mr. Lobell’s sole remaining assignment of error challenging the trial court’s award of restoration costs. Having reviewed the testimony and exhibits bearing upon this issue, we conclude that the trial judge was not clearly wrong and acted reasonably when he awarded 2025 Canal $3,230,162.72 in restoration costs. We thus…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Mart v. HillSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1987
- Corbello v. Iowa ProductionSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2003
- Scott v. ZaheriLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2014
- Kenneth H. Lobell v. Cindy Ann RosenbergSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2015
- Watson v. HicksLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2015
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lobell v. RosenbergLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2017
- Lobell v. DennLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2018
- Lobell v. DennLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2018
- Louise Kaltenbaugh, ph.D. and Kathernie Robinson, ph.D. v. Board of Supervisors, Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College at Baton Rouge (Southern University at New Orleans Campus)Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2019