Skip to main content
· 4/25/1904

New Orleans Terminal Co. v. Firemen's Charitable Ass'n

Citations

  • 115 La. 442
  • 39 So. 437
  • 1904 La. LEXIS 524

Syllabus

<p>Expropriation — Appeal by Plaintiff Cobpobation.</p> <p>The fact that under Civ. Code, arts. 2636, 2637, a defendant in an expropriation suit, on filing specially either of the defenses contemplated by those articles, may perhaps appeal suspensively from the judgment of expropriation, and that Civ. Code, art. 2634, may be modified to that extent, does not justify the conclusion that the latter article is repealed or abrogated, in so far as it allows to the plaintiff corporation an appeal upon the question of the amount of the damages assessed, notwithstanding the payment or deposit of such amount.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • remanding where, but for an error in discounting a medical provider’s opinion, the ALJ “could well have reached a different conclusion regarding the” claimant’s RFC
  • “In contrast, an ALJ does not need to provide ‘good reasons’ for the weight assigned to an opinion from a medical source that is not an acceptable medical source.” (quoting Armata v. Berryhill, No. 3:17-cv-30054-KAR, 2018 WL 4829180, at (D. Mass. Oct. 4, 2018))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Monroe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.