Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., 46 So. 2d 122.

44 citing documents.

United Home Care, Inc., Trinity Home Health Care, Inc. and John D. Jones v. Charlie Simpson, Charles Gardner, … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
3 Further, the insured’s “dilatory conduct” could not negate the protection of “tort victims from insolvent tortfeasors.” So.
Joyce Gorman v. City of Opelousas 148 So. 3d 888 La. 2014
(1950) (plurality opinion), which involved an occurrence policy, 10 this court recognized that the Direct Action Statute “expresses the public policy of this State that an insurance policy against liability is not issued primarily for the protection of the insured but for the protection of the public.”
State ex rel. Division of Administration, Office of Risk Management v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. 56 So. 3d 1236 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
at 22-25 , 29 So.2d at 178-79 ; West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , -28 (La.1950); and Miller, 221 So.2d at 559-60 .
Regions Bank v. Carroll Kountz, Ken Sullivan and Bryant Kountz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Basing the decision on public policy considerations as expressed in West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., So.2d 122 (1950) and Williams v. Lemaire, 94-1465 (La.App.
Regions Bank v. Kountz 931 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Basing the decision on public policy considerations as expressed in West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , (1950) and Williams v. Lemaire, 94-1465 (La.App.
Estate of Patout v. City of New Iberia 849 So. 2d 535 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
(1950), the fifth circuit followed the supreme court's ruling "that an injured third party who is not at fault does not lose his cause of action because of the insured's breach of the notice provisions in the policy."
Bujol v. Entergy Services, Inc. 833 So. 2d 947 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
For legitimate reasons of public policy, as expressed in West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., [ , (1950)] and its progeny, those rights may not be divested by the breach of a policy condition requiring prompt notice, when the delay is due to the fault of the insured, over whom injured persons have no control.
Haynes v. NEW ORLEANS ARCHDIOCESAN 805 So. 2d 320 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
(1950); Williams v. Lemaire, 94-1465 (La.App.
Anderson v. Ichinose 760 So. 2d 302 La. 1999
(1950), plaintiffs assert that the statute confers substantive rights on third party tort victims which are vested when the injury occurs.
Lott v. Lebon 687 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Plaintiffs, in this connection
Murray v. City of Bunkie 686 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
(1950); Davies v. Consolidated Underwriters, 199 La.
Elrod v. PJ St. Pierre Marine, Inc. 663 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
The three leading Louisiana cases addressing this issue are: , (1950); Pomares v. Kansas City Southern Ry.
Young v. Brown 658 So. 2d 750 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
Co., , (1950); White v. State, Dept. of Public Safety, (La.App.
Williams v. Lemaire 655 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
(1950) supports this argument.
White v. State, Dept. of Public Safety 569 So. 2d 1001 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Petry v. Richard 532 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Pomares v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. 474 So. 2d 976 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
Campbell v. Continental-Emsco Co. 445 So. 2d 70 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Champion v. Panel Era Mfg. Co. 410 So. 2d 1230 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
3rd Cir. 1979); West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , (1950).
Chennault v. Dupree 398 So. 2d 169 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Fakouri v. Insurance Co. of North America 378 So. 2d 1083 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
3rd Cir. 1969); West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , (1950); Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 211 La.
Moskau v. Insurance Co. of North America 366 So. 2d 1004 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
In rejecting this defense, , (1950).
Holtzclaw v. Falco, Inc. 355 So. 2d 1279 La. 1978
459 , (1942); , (1950); see Jones v. Mid-South Insurance Co., 358 F.2d 887 (5 Cir. 1966).
Domingue v. Continental Ins. Co. 348 So. 2d 209 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
351 (1942) , *218 (1950).
O'NEAL v. Southern Farm Bureau Insurance Co. 325 So. 2d 887 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
*892 The law pertaining to lack of notice by an insurer as a , (1950).
Ellerson v. Scott 320 So. 2d 527 La. 1975
688 , (1964); , (1950); Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Auto.
Sherwood v. Stein 259 So. 2d 876 La. 1972
688 , (1964); West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , (1980).
Richard v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 223 So. 2d 858 La. 1969
22:655, , , and Futch v. Fidelity & Casualty Company, 246 La.
Miller v. Marcantel 221 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
However, its interpretation of the closely related notice-of-accident requirement (see Condition 4(a), Footnote 1) is instructive and persuasive as to the principle properly applicable to the interpretation and application of the similar notice requirement now before us. In West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , , the insurer was not notified of the accident until more than a year after the accident.
Johnson v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company 218 So. 2d 375 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1969
459 , ; West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , and Morrison v. New Hampshire Ins.
King v. King 217 So. 2d 395 La. 1968
22:655; , ; Futch v. Fidelity & Casualty Company, 246 La.
Richard v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. 212 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
(1950); and Futch v. Fidelity & Casualty Company, 246 La.
Richard v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 212 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
(1950); and Futch v. Fidelity & Casualty Company, 246 La.
Webb v. Zurich Insurance Company 205 So. 2d 398 La. 1967
459 , ; West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , ; and Morrison v. New Hampshire Ins.
Futch v. Fidelity & Casualty Company 166 So. 2d 274 La. 1964
The Court of Appeal held that, in view of this Court’s , , (1950) the insurer’s obligation to the injured person under the direct action statute (R.S.
Stuckey v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 158 So. 2d 454 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
This principle was extensively discussed and determined in the case of West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., et al., , , which has been followed in numerous cases since decided.
Howard v. Early Chevrolet-Pontiac-Cadillac, Inc. 150 So. 2d 309 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1963
v. Monroe Bakery, Inc. et al., , 46 So.
Musmeci v. American Automobile Insurance Company 146 So. 2d 496 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
459 , ; Continental Casualty Co. v. Quebedeaux, 5 Cir., 234 F.2d 241 ; , 46 So.
Finn v. EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY ASSURANCE CORPORATION 141 So. 2d 852 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1962
347 , ; , ; Miller v. Commercial Standard Ins.
Dumas v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. 125 So. 2d 12 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
Plaintiff cites the case of West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., 1950, , , which holds that an injured party acquired "substantial rights" against the liability insurer of the tort feasor, which became "vested" at the moment of the injury.
Hidalgo v. Dupuy 122 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
See, e.g., West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc., , ; Bougon v. Volunteers of America, La.App.Orl., 151 So.
Kimball v. Audubon Insurance Co. 103 So. 2d 529 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
The Lower Court overruled the defendant’s exception under authority of a , .
Pullen v. EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY ASSUR. CORP. 72 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1954
Churchman v. Ingram 56 So. 2d 297 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1951
2d 347 ; , ; Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 211 La.