DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., 28 So. 2d 346.

27 citing documents.

  • Timmons v. Silman 761 So. 2d 507 La. 2000
    (employee left plant to purchase soft drink); (La.
  • Colletti v. Port Noma, Ltd. 625 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    App.Orl.1946), certiorari denied (employee left plant to obtain soft drink at stand a short distance away); (La.App.
  • Robinson v. F. STRAUSS & SONS, INC. 481 So. 2d 592 La. 1986
    certiorari denied (employee left plant to obtain soft drink at stand a short distance away); certiorari denied (bookkeeper injured when he left work premises to fix hanging charged wire which created danger to others); Clark v. Employers Liability Assur.
  • Lisonbee v. Chicago Mill and Lumber Company 278 So. 2d 5 La. 1973
    App.Orl.1946), certiorari denied (employee left plant to obtain soft drink at stand a short distance away); certiorari denied (bookkeeper injured when he left work premises to fix hanging charged wire which created danger to others); Clark v. Employers Liability Assur.
  • Peterson v. Williams 175 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    Cir. 1936); Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Company, La.App., (1st.
  • Gray v. Broadway 146 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    Co., La.App., , certiorari denied, a bookkeeper received compensation, although injured when voluntarily and in excess of his assigned duties attending to a broken telephone wire dangling on the approaches to his employer’s premises.
  • Malone v. Plaisance Wholesale Grocery 146 So. 2d 853 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    In the case of Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Company, (La.App., 1 Cir., 1946), , the employee was granted compensation although injured when voluntarily and in excess of his assigned duties attending to a broken telephone wire dangling on the employer’s premises.
  • Collins v. Southern Pulpwood Insurance 138 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Braswell v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 135 So. 2d 532 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Effler v. Edwards 142 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    A business may be classified as non-hazardous but its operation may involve what has been called ‘hazardous features’, and an employee engaged in the performance of duties requiring him to come in contact with such hazardous features is entitled to recovery of compensation, Storm v. Johnson, La.App., ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., .
  • Alexander v. Insurance Company of the State of Pa. 131 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
    Co., La.App., , certiorari denied, a bookkeeper received compensation, although injured when voluntarily and in excess of his assigned duties attending to a broken telephone wire dangling on the approaches to his employer's premises.
  • Sykes v. Stout Drilling Co. 124 So. 2d 200 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Daniel v. Transport Insurance Co. 119 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Viator v. Hub City Contractors, Inc. 116 So. 2d 878 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Conlon v. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. 106 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    The case of Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., , cited and relied upon by plaintiff, has no application here because the bookkeeper who was injured had, in addition to his office work, the duty of attending to the company’s gasoline filling station and he was also required to deliver messages and orders to the sawyer at the company’s sawmill.
  • Reed v. Calcasieu Paper Company 98 So. 2d 175 La. 1957
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Reed v. Calcasieu Paper Co. 93 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
  • Fontenot v. Myers 93 So. 2d 245 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    1 Cir., , certiorari denied, where a sawmill clerical worker was held covered by the compensation act.
  • Chase v. Pointe Coupee Parish School Board 89 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
    1 Cir., , at page 350, (writ denied), with this comment: "Great stress is laid upon the fact that plaintiff's duties are essentially those of bookkeeper and office manager and therefore he does not have to use his foot to any extent to perform the services required of him.
  • Williams v. Southern Advance Bag & Paper Company 87 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.
  • Coleman v. Sears, Roebuck & Company 83 So. 2d 469 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1955
  • Johnson v. Cabot Carbon Co. 75 So. 2d 389 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    228 ; Hingle v. Maryland Casualty Company, La.App., 1947, ; Taylor v. Marion T. Fannaly, Inc., La.App., 1948, ; Lee v. International Paper Company, La.App., 1944, ; Brown v. Furr, La.App., 1944, ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., 1947, ; Godeaux v. Travelers Insurance Co., La.App., 1952, ; Anders v. Employers Liability Assurance Corp., La.App., , and Stansbury v. National Auto & Casualty Insurance Company, La.App., 1951, .
  • Brannon v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Ins. Co. 69 So. 2d 1 La. 1953
    39 ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., ; Murphy v. B. Mutti, Inc., La.App., 166 So.
  • Crow v. Hosier 66 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    s We said in the last-cited case: “A business may be classified as nonhazardous but its operation may involve what has been called ‘hazardous features’, and an employee engaged in the performance of duties requiring him to come in contact with such hazardous features is entitled to recovery of compensation, Storm v. Johnson, La.App., ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Company, La.App., .” We conclude after review of all the testimony, including that of Mr. Hosier, that he was either acting as agen
  • Troquille v. Lacaze's Estate 59 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1952
    A business may be classified as non-hazardous but its operation may involve what has been called "hazardous features", and an employee engaged in the performance of duties requiring him to come in contact with such hazardous features is entitled to recovery of compensation, Storm v. Johnson, La.App., ; Rigsby v. John W. Clark Lumber Co., La.App., .
  • Laperouse v. McWilliams Dredging Co. 35 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1948
    App., , Evans v. Central Surety and Insurance Corporation, La.
  • Gilmore v. George W. Garig Transfer 33 So. 2d 99 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
    App., , this Court said ( ): "* * * the jurisprudence is to the effect that no one is called on to perform work while suffering pain in order to recover compensation."