Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Hicks v. Meridian Lumber Co., 94 So. 903.

25 citing documents.

Blanchard v. Travelers Insurance Company 121 So. 2d 515 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Talbot v. Trinity Universal Insurance Company 99 So. 2d 811 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Miller v. Miller 76 So. 2d 3 La. 1954
600 , citing 20 Am.Jur., Evidence, Sections 556 and 608; Raines v. Lyons, La.App., , 94 So.
Stringer v. Brown Paper Mill Co. 66 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
Stokes v. Miller 50 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Henderson v. E. L. Dalton & Co. 47 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
Rivero v. Leaveau 45 So. 2d 418 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
Hemphill v. Tremont Lumber Co. 25 So. 2d 625 La. 1946
Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc. 196 So. 23 La. 1940
Piper v. Spiro 188 So. 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Craig v. Standard Fruit & Steamship Co. 168 So. 794 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
Jackson v. Travelers' Ins. Co. 156 So. 169 La. 1934
Stovall v. S. Bender Iron & Supply Co. 152 So. 387 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
McPherson v. Hillyer Deutsch-Edwards, Inc. 143 So. 89 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
Ludd v. Van Hoose 129 So. 375 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
Substituting the word “hernia” for the word “aneurism,” , 94 So.
Powell v. Ohio Oil Co. 127 So. 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
matism in February, 1929, the evidence at most merely shows he experienced a pain symptomatic of the disease, but does not show he sustained an accidental injury of the physical structure of the body or of the spine, and we do not think the evidence established that any injury was sustained by plaintiff in February, 1929, for which compensation could be allowed (see Hicks vs. Meridian Lumber Co., , 94 So.
Patrick v. Grayson & Yeary 127 So. 116 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
In Hicks vs. Meridian Lumber Co., , 94 So.
Arndt v. D. H. Holmes Co. 119 So. 91 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
Arender v. Grant Timber & Manufacturing Co. 119 So. 498 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
Distinguished Hammons v. Edwards 6 La. App. 752 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
666 , the court said: “In a proceeding under the Workmen’s Compensation Act to obtain compensation *755 for the death of a servant, it is not enough to show that death was probably the result of an accident, but that such was the case must be made out to a legal certainty.” And the opinion in Hicks vs. Meriden Lumber Co., , 94 South.
Becton v. Deas Paving Co. 3 La. App. 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
In the case of Hicks vs. Meridian Lumber Co., , the court said: “It is quite immaterial for the purposes of this case whether the alleged strain brought on the aneurism, or merely *687 hastened the inevitable rupture; for this court would allow compensation in either case.” The court then cites the case of Craft vs. Lumber Co., 151 La.
Poncet v. South New Orleans Light & Traction Co. 3 La. App. 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
See Hicks vs. Meridian Lumber Co. , 94 South.
Connell v. United States Sheet & Window Glass Co. 2 La. App. 93 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
d, but I think perhaps that most of us would figure, perhaps, if the man was going along and working, and so far as we knew carrying out his duties, as he was supposed to do, then suddenly have a fall down stairs, I believe that most of us would assume that the fall caused the cerebral hemorrhage rather than it preceded the fall, but one might precede the other.” In Hicks vs. Meridian Lumber Co., , 91 South.
Kenner v. Standard Oil Co. 1 La. App. 302 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1924
Grisham v. Wray-Dickinson Co. 1 La. App. 56 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1924