Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Seaton v. Kelly, 339 So. 2d 731.

47 citing documents.

Tiffany Wines v. Jamila Hollingsquest and Geico Casualty Company La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
Bernard v. Ellis 76 So. 3d 69 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
Co., 02-1637 (La.6/27/03), , (La.
Halverson v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co. 929 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Boullt , 99-0942 at p. 7, 752 So.2d at 743
Boullt v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 752 So. 2d 739 La. 1999
see also Magnon v. Collins, 98-2822, at 4 (La.7/7/99), ; Taylor v. Rowell, 98-2865, at 6 (La.5/18/99), ; Howell v. Balboa Ins.
Magnon v. Collins 739 So. 2d 191 La. 1999
1990); Armand v. Rhodes, 96-15, at 7, (La.App.
Taylor v. Rowell 736 So. 2d 812 La. 1999
Taylor v. Rowell 727 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Johnson v. Davis 697 So. 2d 311 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Robinson v. National Automotive Insurance 693 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Armand v. Rhodes 685 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Earles v. Inchausti, 95-269 (La.App.
Armand v. Rhodes 685 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Earles v. Inchausti, 95-269 (La.App.
Valentine v. Bonneville Ins. Co. 672 So. 2d 461 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Marcello v. Moreau 672 So. 2d 1104 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
Segura v. Frank 630 So. 2d 714 La. 1994
Galliano v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. 606 So. 2d 580 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
Co., Sharp v. Daigre, supra; (La.
Mills v. Hubbs 597 So. 2d 87 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
Zanca v. Breaux 590 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
Haltom v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 588 So. 2d 792 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Barnes v. Thames 578 So. 2d 1155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Pierron *1163 v. Lirette, (La.
Futch v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. 568 So. 2d 588 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
Sharp v. Daigre 555 So. 2d 1361 La. 1990
Niemann v. Travelers Ins.
Bryant v. Protective Cas. Ins. Co. 554 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
Rodriguez v. Continental Cas. Co. 551 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Meche v. Thibodeaux 550 So. 2d 346 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
Saffel v. Bamburg 540 So. 2d 988 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
Stewart v. Robinson 521 So. 2d 1241 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
stating: "The issue here is not whether plaintiff can "stack" the uninsured motorist coverages on the two policies issued to Kelly.
Tate v. Hanover Ins. Co. 526 So. 2d 1302 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Scherer v. Chaisson 469 So. 2d 510 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
Pierron v. Lirette 468 So. 2d 1305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Carona v. State Farm Ins. Co. 458 So. 2d 1275 La. 1984
Morris v. Mitchell 451 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Block v. Reliance Ins. Co. 433 So. 2d 1040 La. 1983
Malbrough v. Wheat 428 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
Wattigney v. Government Employees Insurance Co. 407 So. 2d 1261 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
The trial judge then correctly determined that the total amount of uninsured motorists coverage was $80,-000.00 in accordance with the concept of “stacking” Graham v. American Casualty Co. of Reading, 261 La.
Hubbard v. Milner 408 So. 2d 1004 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1981
Nall v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. 406 So. 2d 216 La. 1981
Bond v. Commercial Union Assur. Co. 407 So. 2d 401 La. 1981
Co., Deane v. McGee, 261 La.
Suhor v. Gusse 403 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
On plaintiff's demand for cumulating the uninsured motorist coverages of defendant's six separate insurance policies, (La.
Burns v. Fernandez 401 So. 2d 1033 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
in support of the view that stacking should be permitted in the case before us. However, we feel that a close reading of the rule of law used by the Supreme Court in that case in effect applies the premium payment rationale adopted by our court in Briley v. Falati, supra, and applied above.
Bourgeois v. US Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 385 So. 2d 584 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
LaFleur v. Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York 385 So. 2d 1241 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
in which our Supreme Court upheld these policy provisions and clearly held that the injured party must be an insured under the policy of insurance to support a claim for uninsured motorist benefits.
Schmidt v. Estate of Choron 376 So. 2d 579 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
when considering uninsured motorist provisions similar to the language in our policy, concluded that the plaintiff was not entitled to uninsured motorist benefits.
Palombo v. Broussard 370 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
Soileau testified *219 that the Lachaussees did ask if the second policy were applicable but that he told them State Farm wasn't sure because of a pending case on the issue, which was ultimately decided on November 8, 1976.
Breaux v. Government Emp. Ins. Co. 369 So. 2d 1335 La. 1979
Hayden v. Torrence 355 So. 2d 1362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
[2] In Seaton v. Kelly, La., , the Supreme Court found unoffending a limitation of coverage.
Robertson v. Cumis Ins. Co. 355 So. 2d 1371 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978
Lane v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. 344 So. 2d 702 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977