DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., 198 So. 177.

25 citing documents.

  • Parish of Jefferson v. Powerline, LLC 131 So. 3d 250 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2013
  • Wisner v. Illinois Cent. Gulf RR 537 So. 2d 740 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    1st Cir.1977), and other cases use such language, (Orl.App., 1940), which conditioned the "reasonable possibility" test for causal relation on also finding that plaintiff was in good health before the accident and that after the accident a dormant pre-existing illness or old injury disconnected with the accident flared up.
  • Stephens v. Continental Insurance Co. 364 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
  • Hull v. North American Van Lines 343 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    A. Exactly.” (Orleans App., 1940) the court stated: “.
  • Loyd v. Atlas Construction Co. 341 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    consideration for the medical fact to be established, of the conclusiveness and validity of the medical evidence and the materiality, relevance and reliability of the particular lay evidence, according to its focus, foundation and its source.” We are also cognizant of the rule relative to the activation of a (Orls.App., 1940): “It will be seen that the holdings in the foregoing decisions are based upon possibilities and that the courts have adopted the view that, where a person who enjoys good h
  • Jordan v. Travelers Insurance Co. 231 So. 2d 678 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
    *685 (Orl.App., 1940) contains facts apposite to those in the instant matter with particular reference to a sudden change in personality closely related to trauma.
  • Alford v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. 229 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
  • Miller v. Allstate Insurance Company 221 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    Our evaluation of this testimony must be guided by the rule set out in the case of Peppers v. Toye Brothers Yellow Cab Company, La.App., : "* * * where a person who enjoys good health suffers an accident and within a short time thereafter a dormant preexisting illness or old injury disconnected with the accident flares up or becomes active, it will be presumed that the flare up was not a coincidence and that it was set in motion as a direct result of t
  • Phillips v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 209 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
    ed fact that Mr. Phillips had enjoyed good health and no symptoms at all prior to the accident, argue further that where there is a reasonable possibility that the accident caused the flare-up of the dormant disease when viewed in the light of all the circumstances surrounding the case, recovery *798 has been allowed, emphasizing the ruling in Peppers v. Toye Brothers Yellow Cab Company, La.App., (Orl.Cir.
  • Waggoner v. Marquette Casualty Company 181 So. 2d 475 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1965
    See Peppers v. Toye Brothers Yellow Cab Company (La.App., Orl.1940) ; Kline v. Columbia Casualty Co. (La.App.
  • Day v. Columbia Casualty Co. 180 So. 2d 843 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    However he contends that this case comes within the doctrine which is stated in Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., , as follows: “ * * * the courts have adopted the view that, where a person who *845 •enjoys good health suffers an accident and within a short time thereafter a dormant pre-existing illness or old injury disconnected with the accident flares up or becomes active, it will be presumed that the flare up was not a coinci
  • Adams v. Home Indemnity Co. 180 So. 2d 51 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
  • Schoonmaker v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania 156 So. 2d 82 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
    Counsel rely on the case of Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., , for their contention the award' should be increased predicated upon the expression of the medical experts the possibility Plaintiff’s continued suffering and disability from his stomach could have been-, attributed to this accident.
  • Kline v. Columbia Casualty Co. 155 So. 2d 82 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
    App., , the opinion by Judge (now Mr. Justice) McCaleb stated: « * * * the courts have adopted the view that, where a person who enjoys good health suffers an accident and within a short time thereafter a dormant preexisting illness or old injury disconnected with the accident flares up or becomes active, it will be presume
  • Normand v. Bankers Fidelity Life Insurance Co. 148 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    2 Cir., ; Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App.Orl., .
  • Payne v. Continental Southern Lines 135 So. 2d 59 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    From our jurisprudence in support of this position the following authorities are cited: Maroun v. New Orleans Public Service, La.App., (erroneously cited in counsel’s brief ); Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., ; Land v. Colletti, La.App., .
  • Porter v. Dennis Sheen Transfer, Inc. 130 So. 2d 450 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    App., ; Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., .
  • Self v. Johnson 124 So. 2d 324 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
    Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App.Orl., .
  • Milligan v. American Employers' Insurance 124 So. 2d 614 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    However, in the case of Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co. et al., La.App., , which employed the above rule as to the presumption, the attending physician testified that there was a “reasonable possibility” that the pre-existing disease was set in motion as a result of the accident.
  • Rice v. Traders & General Insurance Company 114 So. 2d 92 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
  • Mire v. St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company 103 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    In case of Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., , at page 182, the Court held that where a person enjoys good health, suffers an accident and within a short time thereafter a dormant preexisting illness or old injury disconnected with the accident flares up or becomes active, it will be presumed that the flare up was not a coincidence and that it was set in motion
  • Land v. Colletti 79 So. 2d 641 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    Frye v. Joe Gold Pipe & Supply Co., La.App., ; Peppers v. Toxe Brothers Yellow Cab Co., La.App., ; Causey v. Kansas City Bridge Co., La.App., 1 Cir., 191 So.
  • Schwandt v. Nunez 71 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1954
    909 ; Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., ; Ezell v. Johnson, La.App., .
  • Quaker City Fire & Marine Ins. v. Devrouax 45 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1950
    271 ; Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Company et al., La.App., .” The Haydel truck was being driven up Magnolia Street and the Devrouax truck was on Second Street, going towards the Mississippi River.
  • Giardina v. D'Antoni 1 So. 2d 706 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    271 ; Peppers v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Company, et al., La.App., .