DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Daigle v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 545 So. 2d 1005.

259 citing documents.

  • Gaynell Finister v. Golden Nugget Lake Charles, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
    Importantly, 16 “workers’ compensation is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage.” Daigle v. 17 Sherwin-Williams Co.
  • Floyd Safford v. New Orleans Fire Department La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
    Poissenot, the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that “[t]he analysis [regarding an employee’s entitlement to supplemental earnings benefits] is necessarily a facts and circumstances one in which the court is mindful of the jurisprudential tenet that workers’ compensation is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage.” 2009-2793, p. 6, 56 So.3d at 174 ( (La.
  • Mitchell Loewen Versus The New Orleans Louisiana Saints LLC and Berkley Specialty Underwriting Managers, LLC La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
    Poissenot, 56 So.3d at 174, (La.
  • Mitchell Loewen Versus The New Orleans Louisiana Saints LLC and Berkley Specialty Underwriting Managers, LLC La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
    Poissenot, 56 So.3d at 174, (La.
  • Clarence Earl Bos v. Packaging Corporation of America La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
    It is also worth noting that this “analysis is necessarily a facts and circumstances one in which the court is mindful of the jurisprudential tenet that worker’s compensation law is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage.”
  • Donna Bell v. SGS Petroleum Service Corp. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
    Daigle v. Sherwin—Williams Co., La.
  • Boyd v. CCMSI 262 So. 3d 370 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    Daigle v. Sherwin-Williams Co. , , 1006-07 (La.
  • Joseph Adams v. Georgia Gulf Lake Charles, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
    It is also worth noting that this “analysis is necessarily a facts and circumstances one in which the court is mindful of the jurisprudential tenet that worker’s compensation law is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage.”
  • Adams v. Ga. Gulf Lake Charles, LLC 249 So. 3d 1066 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
  • Katina Hodges v. Golden Nugget Lake Charles, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Hodges v. Golden Nugget Lake Charles, LLC 242 So. 3d 654 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    Daigle v. Sherwin-Williams Co. , , 1009 (La.1989) (quoting *667 Gaspard v. St.
  • Ehrman v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 221 So. 3d 945 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
  • Gabriel v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. 222 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
  • Doane v. Omni Royal Orleans Hotel 204 So. 3d 615 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
  • Vanessa Weaver v. Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co., Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
  • Weaver v. Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co. 186 So. 3d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Roofing & Sheet Metal Works, Inc., 96-2840 (La.7/1/96), ().
  • Kenneth Clark v. Sedgwick Cms, Walgreens Drug Stores La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    “Th[is] analysis is necessarily a facts and circumstances one in which the court is mindful of the jurisprudential tenet that workers’ compensation is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage.”
  • McCoy v. W.A. Kendall & Co. 181 So. 3d 817 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
  • Clark v. Sedgwick CMS 179 So. 3d 943 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    “Th[is] analysis is necessarily a facts and circumstances one in which the court is mindful of the jurisprudential tenet .that workers’ compensation is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage.”
  • Donovan Meche v. Gray Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    Daigle v. Sherwin–Williams Co.
  • Meche v. Gray Insurance Co. 178 So. 3d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
  • Mona Leblanc v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    Average Weekly Wage The WCJ found that Ms. LeBlanc was entitled to TTD benefits “in the amount of $471.52 per week beginning November 8, 2010, subject to a dollar for dollar credit for all workers’ compensation benefits and wages paid.” The WCJ’s which held that bonuses were to be included in the weekly wage calculation as “other wages” pursuant to La.R.S.
  • LeBlanc v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 177 So. 3d 1125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Average Weekly Wage The WCJ found that Ms. LeBlanc was entitled to TTD benefits “in the amount of $471.52 per week beginning November 8, 2010, subject to a dollar for dollar credit for all workers’ compensation benefits and wages paid.” The WCJ’s (La.
  • Cathy Turner v. Lexington House La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
  • Turner v. Lexington House 176 So. 3d 1071 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
  • Groover v. Lafitte's Boudoir, Inc. 162 So. 3d 1184 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    irrespective of whether or not the payment was in the form of wages.” -08 (La.1989), quoting Malone and Johnson, 14 Louisiana Civil Law Treatise, Workers’ Compensation § 324, p. 93 (1980).
  • Massey v. Fresenius Medical Care Holding 152 So. 3d 1019 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
  • Futch v. Horseshoe Casino 146 So. 3d 818 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    In determining if an injured employee has made a prima facie case of entitlement to SEB, the court “may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.”
  • Lafayette Steel Erector, Inc. v. James Constance La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee‟s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Lafayette Steel Erector, Inc. v. Constance 137 So. 3d 1251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Aisola v. Beacon Hospital Management, Inc. 140 So. 3d 71 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Bernard Parish Sheriff’s Office, 09-2793, p. 6 (La.1/9/11), ().
  • Gina Alpizar v. Dollar General Corp. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Alpizar v. Dollar General 134 So. 3d 99 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie ease of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • James Long v. Bengal Transportation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” Daigle v. Sherwin–Williams Co., (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Christy Rogel v. Dollar General Corp. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” Daigle v. Sherwin–Williams Co., (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Long v. Bengal Transportation 127 So. 3d 1103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” Daigle v. Sherwin— Williams Co., (La.
  • Rogel v. Dollar General Corp. 132 So. 3d 978 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Larry Tomasik v. La State Veterans Affairs Office La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
  • Tomasik v. LA State Veterans Affairs Office 124 So. 3d 613 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
  • Rhonda Timberlake v. Christus Health Central Louisiana D/B/A Fara Insurance Services La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to supplemental earnings benefits, the trial court may and should take into account all 7 those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (La.
  • Timberlake v. Christus Health Central 124 So. 3d 1201 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to supplemental earnings benefits, the trial court may and should take into account all | «those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Valerie Fabacher v. Stine, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    ―In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee‘s ability to earn a wage.‖ (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Fabacher v. Stine, Inc. 124 So. 3d 553 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    “In determining if an injured employee has made out a prima facie case of entitlement to [SEBs], the trial court may and should take into account all those factors which might bear on an employee’s ability to earn a wage.” (quoting Gaspard v. St.
  • Holmes v. Nursecare Nursing & Rehabilitation Center 121 So. 3d 720 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
  • Lester Racca v. Acme Truck Lines, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    Co., -09 (La.1989) (footnotes omitted), stated: 13 “The threshold prerequisite to the recovery of supplemental earnings benefits, as set forth in subparagraph (3)(a) is that the employee‟s injury result in his „inability to earn wages equal to ninety percent
  • Racca v. Acme Truck Lines, Inc. 115 So. 3d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Co., -09 (La.1989) (footnotes omitted), stated: | u“The threshold prerequisite to the recovery of supplemental earnings benefits, as set forth in subparagraph (3)(a) is that the employee’s injury result in his ‘inability to earn wages equal to ninety percent or more of the wages he was earning at the time of the injur
  • Lopez v. Marques Food Distributors 110 So. 3d 1132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Peveto v. WHC Contractors, 93-1402 (La.1/14/94); .
  • Hahn v. X-Cel Air Conditioning, Inc. 108 So. 3d 262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
  • Dubuisson v. Amclyde Engineered Products Co. 112 So. 3d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    *903 -07 (La.1989); Carignan v. Louisiana Compressor Maint.
  • Redmann v. Bridgefield Casualty Insurance 88 So. 3d 1087 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012