Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Steadman v. Pearl Assurance Company, 134 So. 2d 884.

24 citing documents.

Audubon Orthopedic & Sports Medicine, APMC v. Lafayette Insurance Co. 38 So. 3d 963 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
Co., , -87 (1961); Ibrahim v. Hawkins, 02-0350, p. 4 (La.App.
Reed v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 832 So. 2d 1132 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Calogero v. Safeway Ins. Co. of Louisiana 753 So. 2d 170 La. 2000
Hart v. Allstate Ins. Co. 437 So. 2d 823 La. 1983
Hart v. Allstate Ins. Co. 426 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
Henley v. Sullivan 391 So. 2d 838 La. 1980
Riverland Oil Mill v. Underwriters for Lloyd's 368 So. 2d 156 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1979
Steadman v. Pearl Assurance Company, supra [ , ]; Moore v. St.
Bauman v. Hanover Ins. Co. 353 So. 2d 1058 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
Foster v. Western World Ins. Co. 339 So. 2d 395 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Guillory v. New York Fire and Marine Insurance Co., La.App., .
Campbell v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 331 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Blackwell v. Daigle 317 So. 2d 18 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Bass v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 315 So. 2d 897 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
The action and attitude of the plaintiff, as reflected from the above statement of facts, , La.App., , .
Holmes v. Motors Insurance Corporation 277 So. 2d 472 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
1101 , (1971); , (1961).
Evans v. LIFETIME SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 275 So. 2d 432 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1973
Steadman v. Pearl Assurance Co., cited above, at [ ,] 134 So.2d [884,] 888; Fruge v. Pacific Employers Insurance Co., 226 La.
American Motorists Insurance v. Wilson 256 So. 2d 813 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Upon review of this case the Supreme Court at , (1961), affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeal insofar as it maintained the exception of no cause or right of action but otherwise reversed the judgment and ordered the matter remanded with instructions to the plaintiff to file an amended petition containing a copy of the proof of loss and the do
Gatte v. Coal Operators Casualty Company 225 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Moore v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company 203 So. 2d 548 La. 1967
Furthermore, since the statute plainly provides that demand for payment is essential to the imposition of penalties, it would be improper to infer that the insurer had waived its right to a demand for payment ( , ), even though it had unconditionally acknowledged its liability for compensation.
Guillory v. New York Fire and Marine Insurance Co. 201 So. 2d 366 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
Sensat v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company 176 So. 2d 804 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1965
Wilkins v. Allstate Insurance Company 173 So. 2d 199 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
Steadman v. Pearl Assurance Company 167 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1964
Wallace v. Hanover Insurance Company of New York 164 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
332 and cases cited therein; , .
Williams v. Travelers Insurance Company 157 So. 2d 356 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
Mayes v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 141 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
In this connection, we note the following appropriate and relevant enunci-ations in the case of Steadman v. Pearl Assurance Company, Ltd., , (1961): “A review of the jurisprudence interpreting LSA-R.S.