DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Co., 72 So. 2d 601.

16 citing documents.

  • Van Dyke v. Colfax Creosoting Company 295 So. 2d 589 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
  • Blanchard v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. 280 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
  • Weber v. McLean Trucking Company 265 So. 2d 628 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1972
  • Johnson v. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. of Wis. 250 So. 2d 38 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
    Griffin v. Employers' Liability Insurance Co., La.App., ; Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Co., La.App., .
  • Rezza v. Cziffer 186 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
    decided by the late Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit, towit: "A court, in applying medical evidence to facts in a case of this kind, has to apply common sense and everyday experience to correctly resolve a situation.
  • Griffin v. EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY 186 So. 2d 349 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
    decided by the late Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit, we find the following quotation, which is apropos here: "The distinction between probability and possibility should not follow too slavishly the witnesses' choice of words, as sometimes happens in respect to medical testimony.
  • Wallace v. Insurance Co. of North America 176 So. 2d 762 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    These are Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Company, La.App., (1st Cir. 1954); Neldare v. Schuylkill Products Company, La.App., (1st Cir. 1958); Howard v. Globe Indemnity Co., La.App., (1st.
  • Tullier v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. 141 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    inion of this Court that the defendant insurance Company was arbitrary and capricious in not continuing the compensation payments and in refusing to pay any medical, except a temporary payment of three weeks nursing, and for this reason will allow the statutory penalties and attorney fees as provided under the compensation statute.” We cite the case of Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Company, La.App., , as being quite similar to the case at bar.
  • Hoffman v. City of New Orleans 121 So. 2d 12 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    This calls to mind what our brothers of the First Circuit said in Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Co., La.App., , 609: “A court, in applying medical evidence to facts in a case of this kind, has to apply common sense and everyday experience to correctly resolve a situation.
  • Brian v. Employers Casualty Co. 111 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
    * * * The weight of such testimony, however, should not be too sharply discounted because of the disposition of the highly-trained scientific mind to refrain from unqualified statements or opinions on such matters as causation.” -610 , commented on the subject and stated: “A court, in applying medical evidence to facts in a case of this kind, has to apply common sense and everyday experience to correctly resolve a situation.
  • Neldare v. Schuylkill Products Co. 107 So. 2d 487 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    of Appeals, (Writ of certiorari denied), this court said: “It is now well settled that to constitute an accident within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Law in cases where the work of the claimant entails regularly heavy physical effort, it is hot necessary that the injury from which disability follows be the result
  • Talbot v. Trinity Universal Insurance Company 99 So. 2d 811 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    330 ; Hill v. J. B. Beaird Corp., La.App., ; Dortch v. Louisiana Central Lumber Co., La.App., ; Stiles v. International Paper Co., La.App., ; Lampkin v. Kent Piling Co., La.App., ; Sharp Essor Standard Oil Co., La.App., ; Sepulvado v. Mansfield Hardwood Lumber Co., La.App., ; Kraemer v. Jahncke Services [Inc.], La.App., .
  • Brown v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company 96 So. 2d 357 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1957
    1954, ; Kraemer v. Jahncke Services, Inc., La.App.1956, ; Clifton v. Arnold, La.App.
  • Roberson v. Michigan Mutual Liability Company 90 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    330 ; Hill v. J. B. Beaird Corp., La.App., ; Dortch v. Louisiana Central Lumber Co., La.App., ; Stiles v. International Paper Co., La.App., ; Lampkin v. Kent Piling Co., La.App., ; Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Co., La.App., ; Sepulvado v. *470 Mansfield Hardwood Lumber Co., La.App., ; Kraemer v. Jahncke Services, La.App., .
  • Sparks v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance 83 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    We are fully aware of the principle of the qualified nature of opinion evidence, particularly with respect to the testimony of medical experts diligently urged by learned counsel for plaintiff, upon the basis of Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Co., La.App., , the opinion in which referred to Larsen’s Workmen’s Compensation Law, Volume 2, Section 80.-32, page 322.
  • Payton v. Great American Indemnity Co. 83 So. 2d 575 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1955
    Sharp v. Esso Standard Oil Co., La.App., .