Legal Opinion

Singleton v. Ross

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 16, 1995No. Nos. 94-CA-1947, 94-CA-1948 and 94-CA-1949Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partArmstrong, Judge

I agree that the trial court correctly assigned one hundred percent of fault to Kah-rim Singleton and, for the reasons set forth below, join with the majority in affirming that portion of the trial court judgment. I also would affirm that portion of the trial court judgment awarding attorney’s fees to Malcolm Ross’s attorney, Jim Maher III, and would increase that award to encompass work done on appeal by Mr. Maher. Therefore, I dissent from the majority to the extent that they reverse the judgment of the trial court as to the award of attorney’s fees.

These appeals follow a bench trial in…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Rosell v. EscoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
  2. Stobart v. State Through DOTDSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
  3. Arceneaux v. DomingueSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1978
  4. Canter v. Koehring CompanySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1973
  5. Sistler v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1990

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API