Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Mundy v. Dept. of Health & Human Resources, 593 So. 2d 346.

88 citing documents.

Ellen F. Earhart v. Great American Insurance Company and Sentry Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2025
Trinidad Preciado v. Beaucoup Crawfish of Eunice La Restaurant Association Sif La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
23:1031; O’Regan v. Preferred Enterprises, Inc., 98–1602 (La.3/17/00)
Eddrina Woodard v. Brookshire Grocery Company La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
Mundy v. Dept. of Health & Human Resources, (La.
Stephen Michael Brightbill (Deceased) Versus Circuit Grand Bayou, L.L.C. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2022
Mundy v. Dept. of Health & 21-CA-578 13 Human Resources, (La.
Kathleen Edigo and David Edigo v. Otis Elevator Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
Holden v. Mike's Catfish Inn, Inc. 243 So. 3d 588 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Mundy v. Department of Health and Human Resources , , 349 (La.
Elmuflihi v. Cent. Oil & Supply Corp. 245 So. 3d 155 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
Washington v. Gallo Mechanical Contractors, LLC 221 So. 3d 116 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
11/7/16), , citing Mundy v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., (La.
Joliboix v. Cajun Comfort, Inc. 207 So. 3d 655 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Mundy v. Dept. of Health & Human Resources, (La.
Sislo v. New Orleans Center for Creative Arts 198 So. 3d 1202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Mundy v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res.
Lafitte-Nesom v. Christus Schumpert Highland 188 So. 3d 1100 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
On May 13, 2015, the ad hoc WCJ rendered reasons for judgment, outlining the facts and finding that the issue was governed by Mundy v. Department of Health & Human Res., which delineated the “arising out of’ and “in the course of’ requirements for coverage under R.S.
Maxwell v. Care Solutions, Inc. 179 So. 3d 650 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
Patrick Terrill Randall v. Xceptional Flooring, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Xceptional argues the instant case is similar to Mundy v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., wherein the supreme court found a nurse to 6 be outside the course and scope of employment when she was stabbed at her workplace.
Randall v. Xceptional Flooring, Inc. 129 So. 3d 882 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Xceptional argues the instant case is similar to Mundy v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., wherein the supreme court found a nurse to |7be outside the course and scope of employment when she was stabbed at her workplace.
Stewart v. Boh Bros. Construction Co. 128 So. 3d 398 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Chatagnier v. 1st A Southeast Incs, L.L.C. 115 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
McLin, 851 So.2d at 1140
Ruiz v. City of New Orleans 109 So. 3d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Tommie Hebert and Melissa Anne Hebert v. J. Oran Richard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
Mundy v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res.
Hebert v. Richard 72 So. 3d 892 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Mundy v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res.
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
Barbara Carradine v. Regis Corporation La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
See Mundy v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res.
Carradine v. Regis Corp. 52 So. 3d 181 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
See Mundy v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res.
Posey v. NOMAC DRILLING CORP. 16 So. 3d 1211 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
Cindi Babineaux v. Pnk (Lake Charles), LLC, L'Auberge Du Lac Hotel & Casino La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
Babineaux v. PNK (Lake Charles), L.L.C. 6 So. 3d 939 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
| r, is pertinent to the instant case and involved a plaintiff who was physically attacked and injured in an elevator while stopped on the second floor before arriving at her work station on the eleventh floor.
Obein v. Mitcham Peach Farms, LLC 997 So. 2d 670 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
23:1031; McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors, Inc., 02-1539 (La.7/2/03)
Wells v. Higginbotham 989 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Workers'comp. Corp. v. Nat. Serv. Indust. 980 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
23:1031; O'Regan v. Preferred Enterprises, Inc., 98-1602 (La.3/17/00), ; (La.
Lirette v. Patterson Services, Inc. 951 So. 2d 223 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
Harris v. State ex rel. Department of Public Safety & Corrections 950 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
The leading case in Louisiana on this issue is Mundy v. Department of Health & Human Resources, (La.
Martin v. Pride Offshore Co. 950 So. 2d 805 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
citing Mundy v. Department of Health and Human Resources at 349 Rehearing Denied.
James R. Duplechain v. Bell Office Supply La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
“[T]his court has recognized the mutual interdependence of the two concepts in determining the relationship of the injury to the employment.” Mundy v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res.
Duplechain v. Bell Office Supply 926 So. 2d 149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
“[T]his court has recognized the mutual interdependence of the two concepts in determining the relationship of the injury to the employment.” Mundy v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res.
Pruitt v. Brinker, Inc. 899 So. 2d 46 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Ray v. City of New Orleans 867 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
Seal v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans 857 So. 2d 1065 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors 851 So. 2d 1135 La. 2003
23:1031; O'Regan v. Preferred Enterprises, Inc., 98-1602 (La.3/17/00)
Fortenberry v. CR Bard, Inc. 830 So. 2d 1025 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors, Inc. 818 So. 2d 947 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Mundy v. Dep’t of Health & Human Resources
Boyte v. Ward North American Insurance Co. 818 So. 2d 293 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
Mundy v. Dept. of Health & Human Resources
Winkler v. Wadleigh Offshore, Inc. 817 So. 2d 313 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Robinson v. Brown 803 So. 2d 396 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
Matrana v. Argonaut Great Central Insurance Co. 806 So. 2d 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Mundy v. Department of Health & Human Resources
Ott v. LPK Systems, Inc. 812 So. 2d 38 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Further, the Witcoskies and Ott argue that the trial court erred in holding that the policy’s exclusion was applicable, because Michael Witcoskie and Santana Meaux were not in the course and scope of their employment at the time of their murders, and therefore should not have been considered an “employee”
Sallean v. Jefferson Parish Medical Society 788 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
The Defendant also contends that the doctrines of minor deviation and re-entry are inconsistent with Mundy v. Dep’t of Health and Human Resources, and Brown v. Ackel, 00-287 (La.App.
Johnson v. Allstate Insurance Co. 776 So. 2d 1219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Haywood v. Dugal 772 So. 2d 240 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
Brown v. Ackel 767 So. 2d 827 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by