Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Ponthieux v. Lindsay, 226 So. 2d 482.
-
Wooley v. AMCARE HEALTH PLANS OF LOUISIANA
944 So. 2d 668
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
3 Cir.1968) (on second rehearing), and the authorities cited therein, affirmed, , (1969).
-
Harris v. Angelina Casualty Co.
559 So. 2d 545
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
3d Cir.1968), affirmed on other grounds, , (1969).
- RGC Investments, Inc. v. Almerico 435 So. 2d 1043 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
- South Louisiana Contractors, Inc. v. Freeman 393 So. 2d 461 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
- Tucker v. Tucker 378 So. 2d 498 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1979
-
Lushute v. Diesi
354 So. 2d 179
La. 1978
(1969); McMorris v. Home Indemnity Ins.
-
Swain v. Swain
339 So. 2d 453
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
3rd Cir. 1968), affirmed, , (1969).
-
Distinguished
Evans v. Naihaus
326 So. 2d 601
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
(1969), which involved "the mere isolated use of a casual contractor to move and repair some rental units .
- Paige v. Tregre 283 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
-
Distinguished
Broussard v. Adams
270 So. 2d 913
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
(1969), which was cited and relied on.by the trial court.
-
Doss v. American Ventures, Inc.
261 So. 2d 615
La. 1972
In one of our more recent decisions on this issue, , (1969), it was contended that the defendant therein (an insurance agent) was liable in compensation for injuries to plaintiff which were sustained when the latter was engaged in moving buildings for the defendant, it being asserted that the buildings were to be rented by the defendant for profit.
- Jason v. Blanchard 261 So. 2d 296 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
-
Fontenot v. Travelers Insurance Co.
236 So. 2d 889
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
1 Cir. 1963); McMorris v. Home Indemnity Insurance Company, supra; , (1969).
-
Moak v. Link-Belt Company
229 So. 2d 395
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
In Ponthieux v. Lindsay, La., 485-486 (1969), the court observes: "It is, of course, well established that the purpose of LRS 23:1061 is to prevent the evasion of the compensation provisions of the law by contracting out part of the principal's regular and hazardous occupation or his contractual obligation and, therefore, he is not liable in