Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Edwards v. Louisiana Forestry Commission, 60 So. 2d 449.

25 citing documents.

Colletti v. Port Noma, Ltd. 625 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
(1952); and Glory, supra.
Benoit v. Capitol Mfg. Co. 617 So. 2d 477 La. 1993
(1952), adopted a zone of special danger rule.
Glory v. ZUPPARDO'S ECONO. SUPERMARKET, INC. 532 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
Harris v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 485 So. 2d 965 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
As to the merits, we note the trial court, in its reasons for judgment, carefully states: This Court is of the opinion that plaintiff's claim falls within the ambit of the Workmen's Compensation Act primarily in light of the Louisiana Supreme Court holding in Edwards v. Louisiana Forestry Commission [ ], which states: ...
Quinney v. Maryland Casualty Co. 347 So. 2d 921 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Lisonbee v. Chicago Mill and Lumber Company 278 So. 2d 5 La. 1973
1087 , (1966), , (1952), as well as vastly preponderant modern jurisprudential interpretations.
Templet v. Intracoastal Truck Line, Inc. 230 So. 2d 74 La. 1969
( , ) “From all the cases discussed, it appears that when' an employee, at a reasonable time before or after work, enters the ingress or egress of the premises of the employer, which is necessary to the business of the employer, the employee is considered in principle as on the premises and an accident ther
Criticized Francis v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation 225 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
19 (1932), , (1952), noting "the inability of the courts to draft any determinative test."
Templet v. Intracoastal Truck Line, Inc. 217 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Discussing the meaning of “arising out of” the employment, Edwards v. Louisiana *731 Forestry Comm., , (1952), quotes with approval the conclusion : “ * * * that under the broad view now taken of these statutes, ‘ * * * no more is necessary than that the work subject the employee to a peril which comes from the fact that he is required to be in the place where it strikes when it does so.
Lewis v. Bellow 212 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1968
Powell v. Gold Crown Stamp Company 204 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1967
720 , (1942); , (1952); Livingston v. Henry & Hall, La.
Rogers v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company 173 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1965
Although the Kern case was not cited, the court in the Livingston case applied both the "time, place and circumstance" rule of the Kern case, and another rule referred to as the "zone of special danger" , .
Colston v. Great American Insurance 173 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
In a later leading case, , , our Supreme Court held an employee’s disability compensable as arising out of and in the course of his employment, even though when incurred in departing from the post of duty in order to rescue a child attacked by a large dog, because the rescue attempt ‘was reasonably within the scope of those thing
Blake v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 169 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
In the Livingston case the court considered and one of the Judges comprising the majority concurred in the theory that the case fell within another somewhat artificial principle designated as the “zone of danger” , .
LeCompte v. Kay 156 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Concerning the question of whether decedent’s accidental death arose out of his employment by defendant, it is appellants’ position, predicated upon Livingston v. Henry & Hall, La.App., , , , an employee’s injury or death arises out of his employment whenever his employment requires his presence at the place where the accident occurs at the time of its occurrence.
Gray v. Broadway 146 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
In a later leading case, , , our Supreme Court held an employee’s disability compen-sable as arising out of and in the course of his employment, even though when incurred in departing from the post of duty in order to rescue a child attacked by a large dog, because the rescue attempt ‘was reasonably within the scope of those thin
Long v. Hardware Mutual Insurance 137 So. 2d 486 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
19 , as well as (concurring opinion) the “zone of special danger” , , is that the shooting arose out of the employment because of the fact that, except for the employment, the victim would not have been at the particular place on the exact date of the occurrence.
Jagneaux v. Marquette Casualty Company 135 So. 2d 794 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
355 , ; Edwards v. Louisiana Forestry Commission (1952), , .
Alexander v. Insurance Company of the State of Pa. 131 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
In a later leading case, , , our Supreme Court held an employee's disability compensable as arising out of and in the course of his employment, even though when incurred in departing from the post of duty in order to rescue a child attacked by a large dog, because the rescue attempt "was reasonably within the scope of those thing
Cutno v. Neeb Kearney & Company 112 So. 2d 628 La. 1959
Rodgers v. Price 92 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
*307 In discussing the difficulty of arriving at a definite rule for determining whether or not the injury to an employee arises out of his employment, Fournet, C. J., in Edwards v. Louisiana Forestry Commission, 1952, , , made the following comment: “As Justice Sutherland says in the Cudahy case [Cudahy Packing Co. of Nebraska v. Parramore, 263 U.S. 418 , 44 S.Ct.
Freeman v. Clark 88 So. 2d 419 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
611 , ; Edwards v. Louisiana Forestry Commission, 1952, , .
O'CONNOR v. American Mutual Liability Ins. Co. 87 So. 2d 16 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
a towerman in defendant's employ left the tower on which he was stationed and descended to the ground to rescue a child from the attacks of a vicious dog and in doing so sustained an injury.
State ex rel. Gill v. Soule 61 So. 2d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
See Edwards v. Louisiana Forestry Comm., La.Sup., and cases cited therein.
Livingston v. Henry & Hall 59 So. 2d 892 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1952
We are, we believe, , reversing the judgment of this court, and citing numerous authorities from our own and other jurisdictions which we believe it unnecessary to set forth in detail here.