DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Spillers v. Northern Assurance Co. of America, 254 So. 2d 125.

15 citing documents.

  • Craig v. Ferguson 494 So. 2d 1273 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
    The district court held that the lease provision requiring the lessee to obtain liability insurance was for the benefit of the lessor and not for the public, (La.App.
  • Bruno v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. 337 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
  • Honeycutt v. Town of Boyce 327 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
  • Guillory v. Nicklos Oil & Gas Co. 315 So. 2d 878 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
    *883 THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Appellee suggests in brief that this court might prefer to consider the exclusive remedy defense on the motion for summary judgment rather than on the peremptory exception and cites: (La.App.
  • Abshire v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Ins. Co. 289 So. 2d 545 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
    App. 1 Cir. 1972); (La.App.
  • Canter v. Koehring Company 283 So. 2d 716 La. 1973
    1st Cir. 1972); (La.App.
  • Shelton v. PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY 280 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1973
    d 579 (La.App., 1st Cir. 1972); Maxey v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, Berry v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company
  • Krennerich v. WCG Investment Corporation 278 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
    (3rd Cir. 1971) and cases discussed therein.
  • Trahan v. Travelers Insurance Co. 278 So. 2d 886 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
    The Sanders case, supra, is more restrictive in allowing a cause of action in this type case than cases decided in the third circuit in that Sanders requires special knowledge on part of the officer in order for a duty to arise, as well as the authority to take action, , (La.App.
  • Johnson v. Schneider 271 So. 2d 579 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    See for example, Spillers v. North Assurance Co. of America, La.App., ; Sampson v. Schultz, La.App., ; Berry v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, La.App., ; Ellender v. Sabel, La.App., ; Adams v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York, La.App., ; Washington v. T. Smith & Son, La.App., .
  • Fontenot v. Insurance Co. of North America 271 So. 2d 323 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    The concurring opinion found that there was no cause of action stated because “neither of plaintiffs’ petitions allege that the duty owed by the corporation to the decedent to furnish safe working conditions was delegated to these defendant executive officers nor that they undertook the performance of this duty.” (La.App.
  • Canter v. Koehring Co. 267 So. 2d 270 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    (3d Cir. 1971) a majority of the panel in the present case stated the law as follows: “In the recent case of Mertice Maxey v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, et al., 225 [255] So.2d 120 (La.App.
  • LeJeune v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company 261 So. 2d 280 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1972
    decided by a different panel of this court, I stated my view of the law as to the duty of an agent to third persons.
  • Dulaney v. Fruge 257 So. 2d 827 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1972
    In the recent case of Spillars v. Northern Assurance Company of America et al., La.App., (3rd Cir. 1971), I stated my view of the law as to the duty of an agent to third persons.
  • Spillers v. Northern Assurance Co. of America 255 So. 2d 772 La. 1972