Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Helton v. Tall Timber Lumber Co., 86 So. 729.

22 citing documents.

O'BRIEN v. Traders and General Insurance Company 136 So. 2d 852 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
La Borde v. McBride 112 So. 2d 319 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
Wysinger v. Godfrey 86 So. 2d 597 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
1 ; Helton v. Tall Timber Lumber Co. of Louisiana, Inc., , 86 So.
Cahee v. United States Casualty Co. 86 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
1 ; Helton v. Tall Timber Lumber Co. of Louisiana, Inc., , 86 So.
Allgood v. Loeb 22 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
Murphy v. Tremont Lumber Co. 22 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
Helton v. Tall Timber Lumber Company of Louisiana, Inc., , 86 So.
Hardware Mut. Casualty Co. v. Standard Coffee Co. 2 So. 2d 89 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
Gallaher v. Ricketts 191 So. 713 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Rodgers v. City of Hammond 178 So. 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
We are content in citing only a few cases that we deem most appropriate to our conclusions in the matter: Helton v. Tall Timber Lumber Company of Louisiana, Inc., , 86 So.
Hollingsworth v. Crossett Lumber Co. 165 So. 311 La. 1935
Hollinsworth v. Crossett Lumber Co. 153 So. 722 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Marquez v. Le Blanc 143 So. 108 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1932
Armes v. Williams Bros. 136 So. 160 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
Lee v. Mark H. Brown Lumber Co. 131 So. 697 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
amended by Act No. 85 of 1926); , 86 So.
Seabury v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corporation 130 So. 1 La. 1930
Seabury v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp. 127 So. 25 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
d where compensation is claimed from or proceedings are taken against the principal, then, in the application of this act, reference to the principal shall be substituted for reference to the employer, except that the amount of compensation shall be calculated with reference to the earnings of the workman under the employer by whom he is immediately employed.” , 86 So.
Robinson v. Younse Lbr. Co. 8 La. App. 160 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
186 , , in support of his contentions.
Jackson v. Young 6 La. App. 854 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
“The only case in the Supreme Court involving this phase of the question is that of Helton vs. Tall Timber Lumber Co. , 86 South.
Gaiennie Co. v. Chisolm 3 La. App. 358 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
In Helton vs. Tall Timber Lumber Co., , 86 South.
Burt v. Davis-Wood Lumber Co. 102 So. 87 La. 1924
Dick v. Gravel Logging Co. 95 So. 99 La. 1922
“It is the contention of defendant’s , 86 South.
Bell v. Albert Hanson Lumber Co. 92 So. 350 La. 1922

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by