Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Ins. Co., 69 So. 2d 1.

95 citing documents.

Turner v. State ex rel. Department of Health & Human Resources 475 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
9 (1932); Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , (1953); Phillips v. Dresser Engineering Co., 351 * (La.App.
Patin v. Continental Cas. Co. 424 So. 2d 1161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Ferrand v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. 398 So. 2d 37 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Dusang v. Henry C. Beck Builders, Inc. 389 So. 2d 367 La. 1980
Gardner v. Minnie, Inc. 381 So. 2d 1253 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Dusang v. Henry C. Beck Builders, Inc. 379 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Lachney v. Cabot Corp. 368 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
(S.Ct.1953); Futrell v. *504 Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, (S.Ct.1973); Malone, Louisiana Workmen's Compensation Law and Practice, Sec.
LeBlanc v. Commercial Union Assur. Co. 349 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Phillips v. Dresser Engineering Co. 351 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
50 (1961) and Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , 69 So.2d.
Lucas v. Ins. Co. of North America 342 So. 2d 591 La. 1977
Co., , (1953); Wright v. National Surety Corp., 221 La.
Jordan v. FARM BUREAU INSURANCE COMPANY 295 So. 2d 909 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1974
161 , , our Supreme Court said: "`There is, of course, no hard and fast rule that can be laid down for guidance in the application of this rule to the limitless variations of fact presented to the courts.
Carroll v. Southern Casualty Insurance Company 285 So. 2d 370 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
Co., , (1953); Lavergne v. Southern *375 Farm Bureau Casualty Ins.
Melerine v. Brown & Root, Inc. 284 So. 2d 809 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , .” The court then cites jurisprudence to the effect that in order to be permanently and totally disabled because of pain, the pain must be of a substantial nature; it must be more than a trivial or minor discomfort.
Smith v. Continental Grain Co. 275 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Co., , (1953) and cases therein cited.” However, in the instant matter, the three orthopedists who testified stated quite clearly Smith could return to work.
Futrell v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company 276 So. 2d 271 La. 1973
Co., , (1953); Lindsey v. Continental Casualty Company, 242 La.
Branum v. J. Ray Mcdermott & Co. 271 So. 2d 698 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Smith v. Travelers Insurance Co. 267 So. 2d 622 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Co., , (1953); Malone, Louisiana Workmen’s Compensation (1964 pocket part, Chapter 13, § 275, p. 147).
Ory v. Metal Building Products Co. 265 So. 2d 338 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Co., , (1953); Wright v. National Surety Corporation, 221 La.
Williams v. Hudson East 261 So. 2d 629 La. 1972
Co., , (1953); Carlino v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., 196 La.
Jackson v. Phoenix Insurance Co. 252 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Perrin v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. 248 So. 2d 58 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
486 , (1952); Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , (1953).
Lamonte v. Frederick E. Menge Co. 237 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Co., , (1953); Lawless v. Steel Erectors, Inc., 254 La.
Lawless v. Steel Erectors, Inc. 222 So. 2d 849 La. 1969
745 , (1961) and Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , (1953).
Veuleman v. Bituminous Casualty Corp. 223 So. 2d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Stein v. American Employers' Insurance 216 So. 2d 405 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Co., , (1953), and authorities there discussed.
Lawless v. Steel Erectors, Inc. 209 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Duncan v. Carlo Ditta, Inc. 206 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Jarrell v. Maryland Casualty Co. 200 So. 2d 332 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
Co., , ; Hunter v. Continental Casualty Co., La.App., .” *335 If the plaintiff attempted the type of labor he performed at Tube-Kote, Inc., the evidence indicates that he would have experienced substantial pain.
Banks v. Almond Bros. Lumber & Supply, Inc. 200 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
In so classifying the laborer, our courts have experienced difficulty and our Supreme Court in Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, , (1953) stated no hard and fast rule can be laid down for guidance, but each case must stand upon its own peculiar facts.
Martin v. Travelers Insurance Co. 200 So. 2d 141 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
character within the intendment of the statute means “disability to perform work of the same or similar description, kind or character (not necessarily the identical position) to that which the claimant was accustomed to perform or was undertaking when the injury occurred.” and, in addition, a statement of the Supreme Court in Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, , (1953) which is as follows: “There is of course, no hard and fast rule that can be layed down for g
Cain v. Wilson Warehouse Co. 193 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Flowers v. EM Toussel Oil Co. 190 So. 2d 147 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
Co., , ; Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., 188 La.
Jones v. Pearce & LeBlanc Contracting Co. 188 So. 2d 215 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
747 , ; Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , ; Hunter v. Continental Casualty Co., La.App., ; Manuel v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., La.App., ; and Ball v. American Marine Corporation, 245 La.
LaCoste v. J. Ray McDermott & Co. 185 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Wells v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. 185 So. 2d 37 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Co., , (1953): “There is, of course, no hard and fast rule that can be laid down for guidance in the application of this rule to the limitless variations of fact presented to the courts.
Tillman v. Webre Steel Co. 182 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Sanderson v. Employers Liability Assurance Corp. 181 So. 2d 869 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Co, , (19S3); Veillion v. Knapp & East, 1S (La.App.
Higginbotham v. Newsom Truck Line, Inc. 181 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
Wright v. National Surety Corp., 221 La.
Smith v. Travelers Insurance Company 174 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1965
Lavergne v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. 171 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1965
Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., , .
Kemp v. L. L. Brewton Lumber Co. 168 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
(1958), our Supreme Court observed that no hard and fast rule can be laid down for guidance but each case, must stand on its own peculiar facts.
Carlock v. Gross 167 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Co., , ; Pohl v. American Bridge Division United States Steel Corporation, La.App., ; Livaccari v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York, supra.
Murphy v. Baton Rouge Coca-Cola Bottling Co. 165 So. 2d 636 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Co., , , and cases therein cited.
Ball v. American Marine Corporation 159 So. 2d 138 La. 1963
Co., , ; Hunter v. Continental Casualty Co., La.App., .
Parish v. Standard Accident Insurance Company 158 So. 2d 892 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
Gary v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 158 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
& Liability Insurance Co., , , in which Chief Justice Fournet stated that the “law does not expect, and it does not contemplate, that a worker, in order to make a living, must work in pain, or that he do so when it will materially increase not only the hazards tO' his own health and safety, but also to those of his fellow employees.”
Thomas v. Gates, Inc. 157 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
747 , ; Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, , ; Bean v. Higgins, Inc., 230 La.
Sisco v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 153 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
In Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company et al., , (1953), Chief Justice Fournet stated a legal principle which appears appropriate: “The law does not expect, and it does not contemplate, that a worker, in order to make a living, must work in pain, or that he do so when it will materially increase not only the hazards to his own health and safety, but
Anderson v. Rowan Drilling Company 150 So. 2d 828 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
Co., , , our Supreme Court said: "There is, of course, no hard and fast rule that can be laid down for guidance in the application of this rule to the limitless variations of fact presented to the courts.
Stanley v. Fireman's Fund Insurance 152 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Co. et al., , (1953) and Knispel v. Gulf States Utilities Co., Inc., 174 La.