DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc., 390 So. 2d 1318.

112 citing documents.

  • Cottonham v. Rockwood Ins. Co. 403 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    The Supreme Court subsequently adopted the odd lot doctrine as the guiding concept in determining permanent total disability in Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc., (La.
  • Hall v. H. B. Zachary Co. 402 So. 2d 761 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    Since the decision in that case, the Supreme Court has adopted the “odd-lot” principal in the case of Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc.
  • Reliford v. Dobson Pulpwood Co. 401 So. 2d 581 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    Substantial pain cases fall within the framework of the odd lot doctrine which was adopted by the Supreme Court in Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc.
  • Lastrapes v. CNA Ins. Co. 401 So. 2d 658 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
    Substantial pain cases may also be analyzed within the framework of the odd lot doctrine which was adopted by this court in Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc.
  • Taintor v. Standard Supply & Hardware Co. 398 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    show that some form of suitable work is regularly and continuously available to the claimant in the area where he resides.” In Oster v. Wetzel Printing Company, Inc., (La.
  • Lee v. Pratt-Farnsworth Construction Co. 397 So. 2d 2 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    and Wilson v. Ebasco Services, Inc., in which the court expounded on and applied the “odd-lot” doctrine.
  • Lattin v. Hica Corp. 395 So. 2d 690 La. 1981
    Substantial pain cases may also be analyzed within the framework of the odd lot doctrine which was adopted by this court in Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc.
  • Allor v. Belden Corp. 393 So. 2d 1233 La. 1981
    See Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc., (La.
  • Wilson v. Ebasco Services, Inc. 393 So. 2d 1248 La. 1981
    Co., Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc., Dusang v. Henry Beck Builders, Inc., supra.
  • Celestine v. Henry Industries, Inc. 394 So. 2d 1260 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
    Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc., et a l., La., (1980).
  • Calogero v. City of New Orleans 397 So. 2d 1252 La. 1980
  • Turner v. American Mut. Ins. Co. 390 So. 2d 1330 La. 1980
    In Oster v. Wetzel Printing, Inc., we held that the odd-lot doctrine should be used as the guiding concept in determining whether an injured employee is unable "to engage in any gainful occupation for wages" and is thus totally and permanently disabled.