Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite McCoy v. Kroger Co., 431 So. 2d 824.

20 citing documents.

James Clifford Arrant v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. C/W Marvin Jack Barnett, Jr. v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. … La. 2015
George McCarthy v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
In support of this claim, Entergy/Gulf States relies primarily on Ferguson v. HDE, Inc., (La.App.
McCarthy v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc. 82 So. 3d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
In support of this claim, Entergy/Gulf States relies primarily on Ferguson v. HDE, Inc., (La.
Becker v. Murphy Oil Corp. 70 So. 3d 885 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
3d Cir.1987)(ruptured disc compensable when caused by single work-related accident on a specific date); (La.App.
Morton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 830 So. 2d 533 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
App. 2d Cir.1985); (La.App.
McConnell v. City of Ruston 660 So. 2d 100 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
illustrates the broader, pre-1990 interpretation of the term, which allowed the claimant to recover benefits under facts similar to those presented here.
Garner v. Pool Co. 652 So. 2d 128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Schmitt v. City of New Orleans 632 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
23:1021(1) requiring that the injury be more than a gradual deterioration or progressive degeneration, -30 (La.
Borel v. Dynamic Offshore Contractors 626 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
23:1021(1) requiring that the injury be more than a gradual deterioration or progressive degeneration has adopted the inconsistency noted in McCoy [ v. Kroger Company, (La.App.
Rice v. AT & T 614 So. 2d 358 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
-30 (La.App.2d Cir.1983), where we stated: We suggest that a compensation scheme that compensates an employee because his degenerative condition suddenly collapses from the continual strain, trauma or exposure in his work place, but does not compensate the employee whose condition deteriorates over a period of tim
Deville v. State, T.H. Harris Vocational & Technical School 580 So. 2d 561 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Nelson v. Roadway Exp., Inc. 573 So. 2d 591 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Reed v. Southern Baptist Hosp. 541 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
Gobert v. PPG Industries, Inc. 534 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Hamilton v. Southern Plastics, Inc. 535 So. 2d 1016 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Houston v. Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp. 531 So. 2d 1129 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Charles v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. 525 So. 2d 1272 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Broussard v. Morton Chemical Co. 478 So. 2d 748 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
There is a divergence of opinion in the jurisprudence concerning the question of whether there must be a precise moment which can be pinpointed as the time of the event which constitutes the “accident.” These two lines of jurisprudence are discussed in McCoy v. Kroger, Co.
Malloy v. AT & T CONSUMER PRODUCTS 475 So. 2d 80 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
Sanders v. Mid-South Trucking, Inc. 458 So. 2d 988 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Following the lead of each counsel who couched their respective argument in terms of whether claimant suffered personal inju *989 ry by accident within the meaning of LRS 23:1021, 1031, (La.App.