Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Young v. Charity Hospital of La. at New Orleans, 77 So. 2d 13.

24 citing documents.

White v. Dept. of Health & Human Resources 385 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Badeaux v. Department of Police 363 So. 2d 1238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
at New Orleans, , , wherein the plaintiff had been orally fired but received no written notice of her dismissal.
Sutton v. DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ETC. 340 So. 2d 1092 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
(1954), the Supreme Court said, at page 14: "Under the Civil Service Act we cannot declare a procedural rule, having the effect of law, void, because it conflicts with our opinion of policy, expedience or justice.
Caston v. Executive Department, Division of State Buildings & Grounds 331 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Day v. Department of Institutions, 228 La.
Biggio v. Department of Safety and Permits 299 So. 2d 504 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Day v. Department of Institutions, 228 La.
Smith v. Board of Com'rs of Port of New Orleans 262 So. 2d 383 La. 1972
The Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal, relying on the Commission’s interpretation of Rule 13.11(d) and this Court’s , (1954).
Carpenter v. Confederate Memorial Medical Center 250 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
at New Orleans, , (1954); Day v. Department of Institutions, 228 La.
Smith v. Board of Commissioners 249 So. 2d 279 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
As to appellant’s contention that the procedural rule concerned is harsh in light of the fact that it does not permit amendment of the defective notice, , , states *282 explicitly that such objection does not effect the constitutional validity of the rule.
Perkins v. Director of Personnel 220 So. 2d 253 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Young v. Charity Hospital of Louisiana, *256 , (1954); Chadwick v. Department of Highways, 238 La.
Guillory v. State Department of Institutions, Louisiana State Penitentiary 219 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Johnson v. State Parks & Recreation Commission 198 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
(1954), the Supreme Court said this: “Under the Civil Service Act we cannot declare a procedural rule, having the effect of law, void because it conflicts with our opinion of policy, expedience or justice.
Tassin v. Louisiana Wildlife & Fisheries Commission 193 So. 2d 812 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
The cases of Young v. Charity Hospital of Louisiana, New Orleans, La., , cited by Civil Service Commission in their opinion are not controlling of the issue presented in the case now before us. In the Young case, supra, no written notice of any type was sent to the employee.
Cain v. Fowler 158 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Bonnette v. Louisiana State Penitentiary 148 So. 2d 92 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
at New Orleans, , ; Day v. Department of Institutions, 228 La.
Singleton v. Iberville Parish School Board 136 So. 2d 809 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
446 , ; , ; State ex rel.
Miller v. State Department of Health 135 So. 2d 570 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
Day v. Department of Institutions, 228 La.
Purdy v. Department of Revenue of the State 116 So. 2d 290 La. 1959
Chadwick v. Department of Highways of the State 116 So. 2d 286 La. 1959
Lewing v. De Soto Parish School Board 113 So. 2d 462 La. 1959
446 , ; , ; State ex rel.
Bennett v. Louisiana Wild Life & Fisheries Commission 101 So. 2d 199 La. 1958
[4] , ; Day v. Department of Institutions, 231 La.
Chantlin v. Acadia Parish School Board 100 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
446 , ; , ; State ex rel.
Fields v. Rapides Parish School Board 93 So. 2d 214 La. 1957
In .a supplemental brief, filed subsequent to the writing of the foregoing, , , is decisive of the issue under consideration here.
Parker v. Board of Barber Examiners 84 So. 2d 80 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
105 , ; , ; Boucher v. Division of Employment Security, 226 La.
Day v. Department of Institutions 81 So. 2d 826 La. 1955
at New Orleans, , , we held that where a permanent civil service employee received no written notification of her discharge and the cause therefor, her right to reinstatement was not affected by failure to file her appeal within thirty days after oral notification of her purported dismissal.