Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Bergeron v. New Amsterdam Casualty Company, 141 So. 2d 832.

17 citing documents.

Ellis v. Normal Life of Louisiana 638 So. 2d 422 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
Guidry v. Orgeron 525 So. 2d 677 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Defendants have cited in support of their argument, and the trial judge relied on, , (1962) in which the court applied Section 1166 in its intended manner and es-topped an insurer from denying coverage because of a non-hazardous employment relationship.
Swilley v. Sun Oil Co. 506 So. 2d 1364 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
Adams v. Denny's Inc. 464 So. 2d 876 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
(1962) in which the supreme court held that a waitress-employee and her husband could not maintain a tort action against her employer for damages she sustained from falling down on the job and suffering a miscarriage.
Perez v. Continental Cas. Co. 367 So. 2d 1284 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
667 , L.R.A.1917D, 1 (1917); , (1962); Colorado v. Johnson Iron Works Ltd., 146 La.
Clarius v. Fogleman Truck Lines, Inc. 367 So. 2d 1264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
And in Jack, supra, , (1962): "Since the section provides compensation for disfigurement or impairment unattended by disability, it transcends the historic base for workmen's compensation: the diminution of earning capacity.
Jack v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 326 So. 2d 584 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
(1962), dealing with Paragraph p, the court stated: "The plaintiffs contend that this section provides for compensation in three *587 instances: in cases not falling within any provisions already made, in cases of serious, permanent disfigurement, and in cases in which the usefulness of a physical func
Davis v. Aetna Casualty Insurance Co. 300 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Co., 1962, , (holding a miscarriage not compensable under subsec.
Ancor v. Belden Concrete Products, Inc. 256 So. 2d 122 La. 1971
667 , L.R.A.1917D, 1 (1917); , (1962); Colorado v. Johnson Iron Works Ltd., 146 La.
Templet v. Intracoastal Truck Line, Inc. 217 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Schmolke v. Krauss Company 217 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
Mouton v. Habetz 215 So. 2d 363 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
(1962); Malone, Louisiana Workmen’s Compensation Law and Practice, Sec.
Golden v. Starns-McConnell Lumber Corp. 172 So. 2d 78 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
Richard v. Landreneau Enterprises 167 So. 2d 827 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Because of this recent (1958) statutory provision, an employee of a business which has secured compensation insurance has been held to be deprived of any remedy whatsoever in tort against his employer, and he has been held to be relegated instead to a claim for workmen’s , ; McCain v. Travelers Insurance Co., La.App.
McCain v. Travelers Insurance Co. 153 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
As to the exclusiveness of the Workmen’s Compensation remedy, , , is controlling.
Johnston v. Fidelity National Bank of Baton Rouge 152 So. 2d 327 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
*331 In considering the 1958 Amendment to the Workmen's Compensation Act, quoted supra, , at pages 835-836 observed: "The section clearly makes recovery under the Workmen's Compensation Law exclusive in those cases to which it is applicable.
Williams v. United States Casualty Company 145 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
Bergeron v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. Supreme Court, La.Sup., .