Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Comeaux v. Sam Broussard Trucking, 657 So. 2d 449.

41 citing documents.

Mulvihill v. Jefferson Parish Hospital Service District No. 2 116 So. 3d 672 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Robert Carmouche v. Kraft Foods La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
App. 3 Cir. 5/31/95), reversed on other grounds, Smith v. Southern Holdings, Inc., 02-1071 (La.
Carmouche v. Kraft Foods, Inc. 62 So. 3d 889 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 5/31/95) , , reversed on other grounds, Smith v. Southern Holdings, Inc., 02-1071 (La.1/28/03), .
Jackson v. Sysco Food Services 934 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
Paul Thomas, Jr. v. Browning-Ferris, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Thomas v. Browning-Ferris, Inc. 871 So. 2d 1161 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Belaire v. Don Shetler Olds Buick Chevrolet 847 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Johnson v. Sunbelt Builders, Inc. 838 So. 2d 907 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Smith v. Southern Holding, Inc. 839 So. 2d 5 La. 2003
App. 3 Cir. 5/31/95), -453 , which affirmed the hearing officer's finding that the employee had de facto chosen a physician, where the employee clearly submitted to treatment and did not request a change in physicians until the doctor released the employee to return to work.
Joseph v. JE Merit Constructors, Inc. 822 So. 2d 72 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
3rd Cir.5/31/95), ; (La.App.
Lormand v. Rossclaire Construction 801 So. 2d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
K-Mart v. Turner 799 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Skelton v. Hunt Forest Products 787 So. 2d 1216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
3 Cir. 5/31/95) ; ; Guillotte v. Dynamic Offshore Contractors, 93-335 (La.App.
Cole v. Langston Companies, Inc. 736 So. 2d 896 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
3 Cir. 5/31/95) ; , citing La.R.S.
First Baptist Church of Lake Arthur v. Fontenot 736 So. 2d 230 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Armond v. Starcastle Dinner Theatre, Inc. 726 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Shaw v. Alfred Miller General & Masonry Contractor 725 So. 2d 520 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
3 Cir. 5/31/95) ; , this court affirmed the trial court’s finding that plaintiff had de facto chosen Dr. Clifton Shepard as his treating physician in light of the fact that he continued to see Dr. Shepard on a monthly basis for a year and, it was not until Dr. Shepard released him to return to work, that plaintiff requested a change in
Lejeune v. Integrated Health Service 729 So. 2d 616 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Scherer v. Interior Plant Design 724 So. 2d 797 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
IHS/Heritage Manor of Kaplan v. Smith 710 So. 2d 1204 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Frantz v. Southern Scrap Material Co. 714 So. 2d 750 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Smetak v. LA. WORKERS'COMPENSATION CORP. 711 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Rideaux v. St. Landry Parish School Bd. 711 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Greis v. Lake Charles Memorial Hosp. 709 So. 2d 986 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Wiley v. Kenneth Parker Logging 711 So. 2d 297 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Fenyes v. Highland Park Medical Center 708 So. 2d 493 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
Jones v. El Mesero Restaurant 702 So. 2d 1133 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
LeJeune v. Trend Services, Inc. 699 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
McGaughey v. City of New Orleans 695 So. 2d 1109 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
Palisi v. City of New Orleans Fire Dept. 690 So. 2d 1018 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
3 Cir.5/31/95); , in support of its contention that the plaintiffs failed to make the initial prima facie showing of entitlement to SEB.
TEXACO INC. v. Foreman 692 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
3 Cir. 5/31/95) ; , 455-56: Nevertheless, the employer introduced evidence that it provided a light duty position to claimant in accordance with the limitations set out by Dr. Shepherd; Dr. Shepherd and Dr. Blanda both testified that claimant was capable of light duty work; and Dr. Blanda specifically testified that claimant would be c
Daigrepont v. Grand Casino Avoyelles 692 So. 2d 518 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
3 Cir. 5/31/95) ; () this court held that “[t]o satisfy the clear and convincing standard, it must be established that the ‘existence of the disputed fact [is] highly probable, that is, much more probable than its non-existence.’” This court further held that a claimant may
Gray v. Courtney Equipment Co. 689 So. 2d 607 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
3 Cir. 5/31/95) , , in which this court held that “to satisfy the clear and convincing standard, it must be established that the ‘existence of the disputed fact [is] highly probable, that is, much more probable than its non-existence.’ ” Id.
Explained Dupree v. Ace Home & Auto 685 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Aymond v. RJ Jones & Sons 690 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Livaudais v. Montgomery Elevator Co. 685 So. 2d 232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
Kennedy v. Martin Gas Transp. Co., Inc. 680 So. 2d 1195 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Fritz v. Home Furniture-Lafayette 677 So. 2d 1132 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Courville v. Omni Drilling 676 So. 2d 861 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Moore v. Sanderson Farms, Inc. 674 So. 2d 478 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
3 Cir. 5/31/95) , , (La.App.
Cormier v. Resthaven Nursing Home 670 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
3 Cir. 5/31/95) , , there must be objective medical evidence to carry the burden of proving disability by clear and convincing evidence.