Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Musick v. Central Carbon Co., 117 So. 277.

25 citing documents.

Wascom v. Miller 101 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
Jenkins v. Pemberton 87 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
Cagnolatti v. Legion Pants Co., supra; , 117 So.
Jenkins v. Pemberton 65 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
Fontenot v. Goldenstern Pipe & Supply Co. 50 So. 2d 484 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Neyland v. Maryland Casualty Co. 28 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
Breitung v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours Co. 17 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1944
Under that decision, we have to look upon the judgment sought to be set aside as one approving a lump sum payment of compensation which can be set aside if the payment made is at a greater discount than eight per centum, except where there is a serious and bona fide dispute as to the employer's liability under the act, , 117 So.
Scott v. Caddo Parish School Board 6 So. 2d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
McCastle v. Architectural Stone Co. 4 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
We list here several cases supporting this jurisprudence: Musick v. Central Carbon Company, Inc., , 117 So.
Puchner v. Employers' Liability Assur. Corp. 5 So. 2d 288 La. 1941
White v. Osterland & Knight Timber Co. 200 So. 674 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
McDaniel v. Great Southern Lumber Co. 197 So. 812 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
Forrestal v. McCray Refrigerator Sales Corp. 196 So. 516 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
Weaver v. Mutual Building & Homestead Ass'n 195 So. 384 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
See Musick v. Central Carbon Company, Inc., , 117 So.
Young v. A. Marx & Son, Inc. 189 So. 167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Bradford v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. 190 So. 210 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Self v. Wyatt Lumber Co. 189 So. 327 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Cagnolatti v. Legion Pants Co. 186 So. 377 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
There is, in fact, only slight similarity between the two, , 117 So.
Calhoun v. Louisiana Delta Hardwood Lumber Co. 182 So. 362 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
Fluitt v. New Orleans, T. & M. Ry. Co. 174 So. 163 La. 1937
Reid v. J. P. Florio & Co. 172 So. 572 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
If this be true, , 117 So.
Horney v. Scott 171 So. 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
Faircloth v. Stearns-Roger Mfg. Co. 147 So. 368 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1933
Nelson v. Employers' Casualty Co. 141 So. 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
Nor do we overlook defendant’s contention that a compromise agreement of a doubtful claim may be entered into, even -though it involves a discount of the amount claimed at a greater rate than 8 per cent., and the cases, , 117 So.
Young v. Glynn 131 So. 51 La. 1930
Guillot v. Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co. 117 So. 558 La. 1928
In Musick v. Central Carbón Co. (our No. 29176) , 1 decided this day, we held that there was nothing in the workmen’s compensation statute which prevented the parties from compromising a claim for compensation when there was serious and substantial ground for doubting whether the employer was liable at all under the statute or liable to the extent claimed, if said