DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Bruno v. Harbert Intern. Inc., 593 So. 2d 357.

834 citing documents.

  • Crockerham v. Weyerhaeuser Holden Wood Products 223 So. 3d 533 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
  • Frazier v. Covenant Services Worldwide 228 So. 3d 1275 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    the workers’ compensation judge *1279 as to whether the claimant’s testimony is credible and whether the claimant has discharged her burden of proof are factual determinations and will not be disturbed upon review in the absence of manifest error or unless clearly wrong, Bruno v. Harbert Int'l, Inc., (La.
  • RHONDA TIMBERLAKE VERSUS CHRISTUS HEALTH CENTRAL LOUISIANA D/B/A CHRISTUS ST. FRANCES CABRINI HOSPITAL La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Timberlake v. Christus Health Central Louisiana 221 So. 3d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., This standard of review precludes an appellate court from setting aside a trial court’s finding of fact in the absence of a manifest error or unless it is clearly wrong.
  • Allen v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 211 So. 3d 1219 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
    Discussion A threshold requirement in a workers’ compensation case is that a plaintiff establish “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., (La.
  • Kirk A. Sparrow v. City of Jeanerette La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
  • Sparrow v. City of Jeanerette 210 So. 3d 460 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., (La.
  • Thibodaux v. Grand Isle Shipyard, Inc. 207 So. 3d 459 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., (La.
  • Evrin S. Ford v. Bechtel Og&c Construction Services, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    herniations or made them worse, and that is the precipitating cause of her lower back complaints.” Injury in the Course and Scope of Employment If a worker brings a workers’ compensation claim against her employer, she bears the burden of initially proving that she suffered “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of [her] employment.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Alvin Bartley v. Schlumberger Technology Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    1/19/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Bartley v. Schlumberger Technology Co. 209 So. 3d 123 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    1/19/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Ford v. Bechtel O.G.C. Construction Services, Inc. 209 So. 3d 110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    isting disc herniations or made them worse, and that is the precipitating cause of her lower back complaints.” Injury in the Course and Scope of Employment If a worker brings a workers’ compensation claim against her employer, she bears the burden of initially proving that she suffered “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of [her] employment.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Margaret Gaines v. Pinecrest Supports & Services Center La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., -61 (La.1992).
  • Perez v. Express Jet 197 So. 3d 270 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
    Iberia Medical Center v. Ward, 09-2705 (La.11/30/10), ; Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., Hill v. IASIS Glenwood Regional Medical, 50,531 (La.App.2d Cir.05/18/16), .
  • O'Bannon v. Moriah Technologies, Inc. 196 So. 3d 127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Prine, 157 So.3d at 739, citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Diana George v. Cajun Outdoor Productions, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    3 views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.” Burden of Proof When a worker brings a compensation claim against her employer, she bears the burden of initially proving that she suffered “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of [her] employment.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l. Inc., La.R.S.
  • George v. Cajun Outdoor Productions, L.L.C. 194 So. 3d 1231 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    “where there are two permissible |4views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.” Burden of Proof When a worker brings a compensation claim against her employer, she bears the burden of initially proving that she suffered “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of [her] employment.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l. Inc., La.R.S.
  • Dow v. Chalmette Restaurant, Ltd. 193 So. 3d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    In deciding whether the claimant has discharged her burden of proof, the fact-finder “should accept as true a witness’s uncontradicted testimony, although-the witness is a party, absent circumstances casting suspicion on the reliability of the testimony’” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc.
  • Hill v. Iasis Glenwood Regional Medical 195 So. 3d 536 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
    23:1031 A. A claimant’s testimony alone may be sufficient to establish an accident provided that “(1) no other evidence discredits or casts serious doubt upon the worker’s version of the incident, *541 |7and (2) the worker’s testimony is corroborated by the circumstances following the alleged incident.” Brown v. Offshore Energy Serv., 47,392 (La.App.
  • Fernandez v. Hand Construction, LLC 194 So. 3d 1149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    4 Cir. 7/20/11), , citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Allen Johnson v. Great West Casualty Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    orrectly identified the jurisprudential requirements for an injured worker to carry his burden of proof in a claim for an unwitnessed accident, it was clear error by the trial court to have failed to determine whether evidence cast serious doubt upon plaintiff’s version of events, as required by Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., (La.
  • Leidelmeijen v. Ferncrest Manor Nursing Home Luba Workers' Comp. 191 So. 3d 38 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Buxton v. Iowa Police Dep’t, 09-0520, pp. 18-19 (La.10/20/09), , 287 (citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., ).
  • Johnson v. Great West Casualty Co. 186 So. 3d 1276 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Having correctly identified the jurisprudential requirements for an injured worker to cany his burden of proof in a claim for an unwitnessed • accident, it was clear error by the trial court to have failed to determine whether evidence cast serious doubt upon plaintiffs version of events, as required by Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., and Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 2010-0245 (La.1/19/11), .
  • Namias v. Sunbelt Innovative Plastics, LLC 190 So. 3d 745 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Prine, 157 So.3d at 739 , citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Payton v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 187 So. 3d 84 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    4 Cir. 7/20/11), , citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., (La.
  • Calumet GP, LLC v. Garrett 186 So. 3d 712 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., -61 (La.1992).
  • Donovan Meche v. Gray Insurance Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., (citations omitted).
  • 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
    See Bruno v. Harbert Int’l. Inc.
  • LeBlanc v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 177 So. 3d 1125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    See Bruno v. Harbert Int’l. Inc.
  • Harvey v. Sol's Pipe & Steel, Inc. 180 So. 3d 486 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc,, Dugan v. St.
  • Galiano v. Lucky Coin Machine Co. 177 So. 3d 742 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Thomas Gibson v. Resin Systems, Inc. and Luba La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    7/2/12), -58 (citations omitted), the supreme court outlined the burden for a workers’ compensation claimant to prove an unwitnessed accident as originally set forth in Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., : The employee in a compensation action has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.
  • Herbert Marshall v. Courville Toyota La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    (first alteration ours), the supreme court stated: A worker’s testimony alone may be sufficient to discharge this burden of proof, provided two elements are satisfied: (1) no other evidence discredits or casts serious doubt upon the worker’s version of the incident; and (2)
  • Gibson v. Resin Systems, Inc. 175 So. 3d 1141 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    | sIn Marange v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc., 11-2678, p. 6 (La.7/2/12), -58 (citations omitted), the supreme court outlined the burden for a workers’ compensation claimant to prove an unwitnessed accident as originally set forth in Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., : The employee in a compensation action has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.
  • Marshall v. Courvelle Toyota 175 So. 3d 1069 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    (first alteration ours), the supreme court stated: A- worker’s testimony alone may be sufficient to discharge this burden of proof, provided two elements are satisfied: (1) no other evidence discredits or casts serious doubt upon the worker’s version of the incident; and (2) the worker’s testimony is co
  • Summers v. Ritz-Carlton New Orleans 171 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    5 Cir. 3/9/10) , , citing, Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Bridges v. Gaten's Adventures Unlimited, L.L.C. 167 So. 3d 992 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Vargas v. Petrin Corporation, 12-1212 (La.App.
  • Jason Montou v. Boise Cascade Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l. Inc.
  • Montou v. Boise Cascade Co. 160 So. 3d 637 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l. Inc.
  • Hayward v. Boh Bros. Construction Co. 169 So. 3d 622 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Roland Sorile v. Lott Oil Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-0245, p. 5 (La.1/19/11)
  • Sorile v. Lott Oil Co. 160 So. 3d 178 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-0245, p. 5 (La.1/19/11), .
  • Marlon Lavalais v. Gilchrist Construction Co., LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    5 Cir. 5/29/02), writ denied, 02-1810 (La.10/4/02), (quoting Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Tubre v. Automobile Club of Southern California 160 So. 3d 1021 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    In Marange v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc., 2011-2678, p. 6 (La.7/2/12), -58 (per curiam) (citations omitted), the Supreme Court |7outIined a workers’ compensation claimant’s burden of proof for an unwit-nessed accident as originally set forth in Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., : The employee in a compensation action has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.
  • Lavalais v. Gilchrist Construction Co. 158 So. 3d 195 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    5 Cir. 5/29/02), , writ denied, 02-1810 (La.10/4/02), (quoting Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Harris v. City of Bastrop 161 So. 3d 948 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., Buxton v. Iowa Police Dept., supra; State, DOTD v. Berry, supra.
  • Millender v. Basf Corp. 168 So. 3d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    See also Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Earl J. Thibodeaux v. Carroll's Towing La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    7/2/12), -58 (per curiam) (citations omitted), the supreme court outlined a workers’ compensation claimant’s burden of proof for an unwitnessed accident as originally set forth in Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., : The employee in a compensation action has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.
  • Thibodeaux v. Carroll's Towing 150 So. 3d 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    STANDARD OF REVIEW In Marange v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc., 11-2678, p. 6 (La.7/2/12), -58 (per curiam) (citations omitted), the supreme court outlined a workers’ compensation claimant’s burden of proof for an unwitnessed accident as originally set forth in Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., (La.