Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Williams v. Regional Transit Authority, 546 So. 2d 150.

82 citing documents.

Trinidad Preciado v. Beaucoup Crawfish of Eunice La Restaurant Association Sif La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
Weber v. State, 93–0062 (La.4/11/94)
Patricia Matthews v. Big Easy Janitorial, L.L.C., and Louisiana Construction and Industry Self Insurers Fund La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
2d at 360 (citing Williams v. Reg’l Transit Auth., (La.
David Pizzati v. Ds Services of America, Inc. and Safety National Casualty Corporation La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
Stewart v. Boh Bros. Construction Co. 128 So. 3d 398 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Ruiz v. City of New Orleans 109 So. 3d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Henry Marange, Jr. v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Marange v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc. 75 So. 3d 990 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Edward L. Williams, Sr. v. Pilgrim's Pride Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Williams v. PILGRIM'S PRIDE CORP. 68 So. 3d 616 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Biscamp v. Sysco East Texas 63 So. 3d 1097 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors, Inc., 02-1539 (La.07/02/03), ; Obien v. Mitcham Peach Farms, L.L.C., 43,637 (La.App.2d Cir.10/29/08), .
Iberia Medical Center v. Ward 53 So. 3d 421 La. 2010
Wilson v. General Motors Corp. 37 So. 3d 602 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
Kenneth Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, LLC 30 So. 3d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
The Louisiana Supreme Court has held that “an employer who has reasonable grounds to controvert the plaintiffs claim does not owe penalties and attorney fees.” Bowens v. General Motors, 92-1307, 92-1322 (La.11/30/92)
Posey v. NOMAC DRILLING CORP. 16 So. 3d 1211 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
OUR LADY OF LAKE MEDICAL CENTER v. Matthews 971 So. 2d 354 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Westley v. Land & Offshore
Hosli v. Rent-A-Center, Inc. 957 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
Martin v. Pride Offshore Co. 950 So. 2d 805 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
citing Williams v. Regional Transit Authority , at 161 Rehearing Denied.
Wiley E. Mauldin v. Town of Church Point La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
In cases where the facts are not in dispute, an employer could reasonably controvert a legal issue involving a statutory defense where the “issue was not conclusively resolved by the jurisprudence at the time that the claim was made.” (La.
Mauldin v. Town of Church Point 925 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Pruitt v. Brinker, Inc. 899 So. 2d 46 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Sheralon F. Moore v. Pitt Grill La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
“[R]eviewing courts must analyze claimed disability caused by mental conditions with utmost caution in view of the nebulous characteristics of mental conditions and the possibility of symptoms being easily feigned.” Westley, 523 So.2d [812,] at 813 [(La.1988)]
Moore v. Pitt Grill 871 So. 2d 1128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
“[Reviewing courts must analyze claimed disability caused by mental conditions with utmost caution in view of the nebulous characteristics of mental conditions and the possibility of symptoms being easily feigned.” Westley , 523 So.2d [812,] at 813 [(La.1988)]
McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors 851 So. 2d 1135 La. 2003
Weber v. State, 93-0062 (La.4/11/94)
Wong v. ConAgra Poultry Co. 845 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Critser v. Dillard's Department Stores, Inc. 836 So. 2d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
-62 (La.1989) (an employer’s decision to contest coverage was not unreasonable when the case involved an unusual issue not conclusively resolved by the jurisprudence at the time the claim was made).
McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors, Inc. 818 So. 2d 947 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Rodriguez v. Freeman Decorating Co. 799 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Williams v. Ravare Masonry Co. 774 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
Inc., 91-1444 (La.1/17/92); ; (La.
O'REGAN v. Preferred Enterprises, Inc. 758 So. 2d 124 La. 2000
Wex S. Malone & H. Alston Johnson, 13 Louisiana Civil Law Treatise Workers' Compensation Law and Practice § 161 (2d ed.1980).
Stuart v. New City Diner 758 So. 2d 345 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
Clement v. Dynasty Transp. 756 So. 2d 377 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Pitts v. Helmrich & Payne Drilling 739 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Clophus v. Taco Bell Corp./HotN'Now 732 So. 2d 692 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
Although Clophus may have been more susceptible to stressful situations than the average employee due to her past problems, "an employee may not recover for mental stress or injury related to ` general conditions of employment.'" ( , 147 *698 (La.1989)) (emphasis in Sparks opinion).
Arwood v. J P & Sons, Inc. 730 So. 2d 525 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
“[Reviewing courts must analyze claimed disability caused by mental conditions with utmost caution in view of the nebulous characteristics of mental conditions and the possibility of symptoms being easily feigned.” Westley, 523 So.2d at 813
Bryan v. Allstate Timber Co. 724 So. 2d 853 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Ross v. REMEDIATION SERVICES OF LA. 714 So. 2d 218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Callihan v. Gulf Coast Marines, Inc. 714 So. 2d 199 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Crawford v. Martin Marietta/Michoud Aerospace 713 So. 2d 781 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
and Clinic, the Supreme Court considered “whether a mental injury induced by mental stress is compensable when it is caused by a significant employment incident and is not accompanied by any apparent signs of physical trauma.” Sparks, 546 So.2d at 139 .
Thomas v. Town of Arnaudville 713 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Tumbs v. Wemco, Inc. 714 So. 2d 761 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
: In view of the sometimes nebulous characteristics of mental injuries and the possibility of symptoms being feigned, utmost care should be exercised in determining whether the employee suffered such an injury and proved that the injury was causally related to his employment.
Allen v. Louisiana Wood Moulding Corp. 706 So. 2d 636 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
see also Bowens v. General Motors Corporation, supra.
Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc. 707 So. 2d 1006 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Charles v. South Cent. Industries 683 So. 2d 706 La. 1996
Westley, 523 So.2d at 813
Wilson v. City of Shreveport 682 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Perilloux v. Brown & Root, Inc. 692 So. 2d 1100 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Renter v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 679 So. 2d 603 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Boyle v. BD. OF SUP'RS OF LA. STATE UNIV. & AGRIC. & MECHANICAL COLLEGE 672 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Hosp., Harris v. Bronco Constr.
Shephard ex rel. Shephard v. Scheeler 674 So. 2d 1135 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
883 , (1945) (sic); , 410 n. 1 (La.App.
LeCroy v. Brand Scaffold Bldg., Inc. 672 So. 2d 181 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
In support of its assertions on this issue, (La.