Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Viator v. Gilbert, 216 So. 2d 821.

82 citing documents.

Unbehagen v. Bollinger Workover, Inc. 411 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Brasseaux v. Stand-By Corp. 402 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Philippe v. Browning Arms Co. 395 So. 2d 310 La. 1981
Lute v. City of Lake Charles 394 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Richard v. Guillory 392 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Sibley v. Menard 398 So. 2d 590 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
(1968); McFarland v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 241 La.
Chaney v. Our Lady of Fatima Cath. Church 391 So. 2d 501 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Holubar v. State 385 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
(1968); Roundtree v. Technical Welding and Fabrication Company, Inc., (La.App.
Stewart v. Schmieder 376 So. 2d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
(1968); McFarland v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 241 La.
Payton v. Travelers Ins. Co. 373 So. 2d 1324 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
Roundtree v. Technical Welding & Fabrication Co. 364 So. 2d 1325 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
Lofton v. Cade 359 So. 2d 1074 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
(1968) and McFarland v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, supra.
Harris v. D'Antoni 355 So. 2d 1049 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
[3] In Welton , , (1968), we stated that although loss of income cannot be computed with mathematical certainty, an actuarial expert's calculations merit substantial consideration in arriving at the award.
Falcon v. Bigelow-Liptak Corp. 356 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Higgins v. Johnson 349 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Crandall v. Scott 350 So. 2d 922 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
Johnson v. International Ins. Co. 347 So. 2d 1279 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
(1968); McFarland v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 241 La.
Welton v. Falcon 341 So. 2d 564 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
Robinson v. Graves 343 So. 2d 147 La. 1977
Blanchard v. Rodrigue 340 So. 2d 1001 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
(1968); McFarland v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 241 La.
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. 341 So. 2d 332 La. 1977
Distefano v. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. 340 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Aymond v. STATE, THROUGH DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS 333 So. 2d 383 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
With particular regard to a , (1968): "Then, too, consideration must be given to the settled jurisprudence of this Court that allowance of monetary damages for loss of future earnings (or support of dependants in case of death) cannot be calculated with mathematical exactitude; that they are speculative in character and the `...
Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. 330 So. 2d 649 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
Triche v. Commercial Union Insurance Company 329 So. 2d 784 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Reeves v. Louisiana and Arkansas Railway Co. 304 So. 2d 370 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Stevens v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, La.App., .
Edwards v. Sims 294 So. 2d 611 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Birdwell v. Reliance Insurance Co. 289 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
(1968) for the rule that plaintiff must prove loss of future earnings by showing that he is incapacitated from doing work of the same or a similar kind for which he is fitted by training and experience.
LeBlanc v. Metal Locking of Louisiana, Inc. 258 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
mages for loss of future earnings (or support of dependents in case of death) cannot be calculated with mathematical exactitude ; that they are speculative in character and the ‘ * * * most that the courts can do * * * is to exercise a sound judicial discretion and award such amount as, all the circumstances considered, may seem just to both litigants and not unduly oppressive to either.’ * * * ” , at 822-23 .
McGlory v. Tullos 255 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
In this regard, , : ‘Thus it appears that plaintiff is entitled to recover for whatever loss of future earnings he will sustain as a result of the accident.
Johns v. Hunt Lumber Company 250 So. 2d 543 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
Abadie v. Employers Group Insurance Co. 250 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Recognizing the difficulty of determining with reasonable certainty and probability the loss of future earnings, in the absence of any scientific and mathematical basis for doing so, , 823 (1968), the Supreme Court indicated the guidelines to be used in making such a determination : “Thus it appears that plaintiff is entitled to recover for whatever loss of future earnings he will sustain as a result of the accident.