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.

  • Prine v. Coastal Bridge Co. 157 So. 3d 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Donald Lester Nowell v. Fara & Nabors Drilling USA, Lp La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc.
  • Nowell v. Nabors Drilling USA, LP 149 So. 3d 348 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc.
  • State, DOTD v. Berry 147 So. 3d 270 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    It concedes the manifest error rule as to factual findings and the vast discretion accorded to credibility calls, Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Church Mutual Insurance Co. v. Dardar 145 So. 3d 271 La. 2014
  • Galloway Jefcoat, LLP v. D. Patrick (Rick") Keating " La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    1/19/11), the supreme court stated: [T]he 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 this testimony.‟” [Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ] at 361 [(La.1992)] (quoting [West v. Bayou Vista Manor, Inc., ], ).
  • Galloway Jefcoat, LLP v. Keating 138 So. 3d 786 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    In Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245, pp. 6-7 (La.1/19/11), , the supreme court stated: [T]he fact-finder “should accept as true a witness’s uneontradieted testimony, although the witness is a party, absent ‘circumstances casting suspicion on the reliability of this testimony.’ ” [Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ] at 361 [ (La.1992) ] (quoting [West v. Bayou Vista Manor, Inc., ], (La.
  • Lafayette Steel Erector, Inc. v. James Constance La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc.
  • Lafayette Steel Erector, Inc. v. Constance 137 So. 3d 1251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc.
  • Cleo Alexander v. Peerless Cleaners La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
    STANDARD OF REVIEW In deciding workers‘ compensation cases where, as here, the accident is unwitnessed, Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., has enunciated the trial court‘s function and the appellate court‘s standard of review: In determining whether the worker has discharged his or her burden of proof, the trial court should accept as true a witness‘s uncontradicted testimony, although the
  • Alexander v. Peerless Cleaners 134 So. 3d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    STANDARD OF REVIEW In deciding workers’ compensation cases where, as here, the accident is unwitnessed, Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., *192 has enunciated the trial court’s function and the appellate court’s standard of review: In determining whether the worker has discharged his or her burden of proof, the trial court should accept as true a witness’s uncontradicted testimony, although the witness is a party, absent “circumstances casting
  • Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. v. Wooden 132 So. 3d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
  • Sicard v. Touro Infirmary 131 So. 3d 989 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245 (La.1/19/11), , citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Linda Anderson v. Kroger 747 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    The trial court erred in failing to apply the factual standard set forth in Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., which is necessary when an alleged accident is unwitnessed.
  • Herschel Carter v. Turner Industries, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245 (La.1/19/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Carter v. Turner Industries 127 So. 3d 1082 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245 (La.1/19/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Anderson v. Kroger, 747 127 So. 3d 1026 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    The trial court erred in failing to apply the factual standard set forth in Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., which is necessary when an alleged accident is unwitnessed.
  • Leroy Herron v. Labor Finders-Lfi Fort Pierce, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    “[A]s in other civil actions, the plaintiff-worker in a compensation action has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., ( and Nelson v. Roadway Express, Inc., )(emphasis ours).
  • Herron v. Labor Finders-LFI Fort Pierce, Inc. 126 So. 3d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    “[A]s in other civil actions, the plaintiff-worker in a compensation ac *862 tion has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., ( and Nelson v. Roadway Express, Inc., )(emphasis ours).
  • Lenig v. Textron Marine & Land Systems 122 So. 3d 1097 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., [La.1992] (citing West v. Bayou Vista Manor, Inc., Malone and Johnson, 13 Civil Law Treatise, Workers’ Compensation, Section *?
  • Holmes v. Nursecare Nursing & Rehabilitation Center 121 So. 3d 720 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
    Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., Alexander v. Brookshire Grocery Company, 42, 855 (La.App.2d Cir.1/9/08), , writ denied, 08-0503 (La.4/25/08), .
  • Church Mutual Insurance Co. v. Dardar 119 So. 3d 967 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    See also Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Angelo Bracey v. City of Alexandria La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    DISCUSSION Work-Related Accident A worker bringing a compensation action against his employer bears the burden of proving, as a threshold requirement, that he suffered “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.” Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., La.R.S.
  • Bracey v. City of Alexandria 115 So. 3d 1211 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    DISCUSSION Work-Related Accident A worker bringing a compensation action against his employer bears the burden of proving, as a threshold requirement, that he suffered “personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.” La.R.S.
  • Joshua B. Doucet v. National Oilwell Varco Fluid Control La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    23:1031(A); Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Doucet v. National Oilwell Varco Fluid Control 120 So. 3d 727 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    *730 23:1031(A); Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Chatagnier v. 1st A Southeast Incs, L.L.C. 115 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Bruno v. Harbert Intern., Inc., Roberts v. Thibodaux Healthcare Center, 05-0774 (La.App.
  • Bourgeois v. Seabright Insurance Co. 115 So. 3d 50 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    In opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment, claimant contends that his deposition testimony established that he performed strenuous physical work activities sufficient to meet his burden of *52 proving an “accident” under 23:1021(1)
  • Marsh v. North Louisiana Medical Center 113 So. 3d 1174 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
  • Rostrop v. Gray Insurance Co. 115 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245 (La.1/19/11); , citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Marti v. City of New Orleans 115 So. 3d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Although the jurisprudence has liberally construed the work-related accident requirement, the employee’s burden of proof is not relaxed; “[rjather, as in other civil actions, the plaintiff-worker in a compensation action has the burden of establishing a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence.” -61 (La.1992).
  • Vargas v. Petrin Corp. 115 So. 3d 483 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
  • Lopez v. Marques Food Distributors 110 So. 3d 1132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc.
  • Charlotte Franklin v. Calcasieu Parish School Board La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    1/19/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Franklin v. Calcasieu Parish School Board 108 So. 3d 907 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245 (La.1/19/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Ruiz v. City of New Orleans 109 So. 3d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Bruno v. Harbert Int'l, Inc.
  • Vicknair v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 111 So. 3d 1065 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See also Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., (La.
  • Blatcher v. Brand Staffing Services, Inc. 106 So. 3d 1182 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 10-245 (La.1/19/11), , citing Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc.
  • Billy Wayne Broadway v. Shane Mitchell Logging, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • Broadway v. Shane Mitchell Logging, Inc. 105 So. 3d 1041 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc.
  • Jason D. Dugas v. Autozone, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    3 Cir. 6/1/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Dugas v. AutoZone, Inc. 103 So. 3d 1271 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    3 Cir. 6/1/11), (citing Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., ).
  • Ronald Dunn, Jr. v. Lakewood Quarters Retirement Community La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    The Louisiana Supreme Court formulated the burden of proof and the standard of review used by appellate courts in workers’
  • Dunn v. Lakewood Quarters Retirement Community 103 So. 3d 1185 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    The Louisiana Supreme Court formulated the burden of proof and the standard of review used by appellate courts in workers’
  • Dustin Estis v. Ambar Lone Star Fluid Service La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    Ambar notes that under Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., (La.
  • Estis v. Ambar Lone Star Fluid Service 100 So. 3d 348 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Am-bar notes that under Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., a claimant’s testimony alone may only meet the burden of proof if: 1) no evidence discredits or casts serious doubt on claimant’s version, and 2) the claimant’s version is corroborated by circumstances following the accident, be they in the form of medical evidence, or testimony of coworkers, family or frie
  • Brown v. Offshore Energy Service, Inc. 104 So. 3d 494 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    Offshore cites the unrelaxed burden of proof for a compensation claimant, set out in Bruno v. Harbert Int’l Inc., and contends that without the requisite corroboration, the claimant’s testimony is insufficient to prove an accident.
  • Marange v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc. 93 So. 3d 1253 La. 2012
    In its reasons for judgment, the OWC hearing officer found Mr. Marange’s version of the incident was not credible, stating: *1257 Based on the Bruno [v. Harbor [Harbert] International, ] case, the Court finds that other evidence discredits or casts serious doubt on Mr. Marange’s version of the incident.
  • Reid-Lopez v. Alternative Service Concept, LLC 96 So. 3d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    5 Cir. 12/12/01) , (citing Bruno v. Harbert Intern., Inc., ).
  • Carmena v. St. Anthony's Home 92 So. 3d 539 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Bruno v. Harbert Int’l, Inc., Carter v. Lakeview Regional Medical Center, 04-1794, p. 4 (La.App.