Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Carter v. Le Blanc Lumber Co., 37 So. 2d 471.
-
Mayon v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.
191 So. 2d 688
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Crimp v. LeBlanc Lumber Co. (La.App., 1948), , Fontenot v. LaFleur (La.App., 1960) , and D & D Planting Co. v. Employers Gas Co. (1960) 240 La.
-
Shively v. Hare
189 So. 2d 12
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
1031 , ; Carter v. Le Blanc Lumber Co. (La.App., 1948) ; and Lynch v. Fisher (La.App., 1949) .
- Peats v. Martin 133 So. 2d 920 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1961
-
Guillory v. Farmers Automobile Insurance
120 So. 2d 84
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Thus Rea v. Dow Motor Co., La.App., 1948, , was an action where plaintiff traveling at a speed of twenty miles per hour in the rain, ran into a parked military car without lights, which was olive green in color, and a portion of it extended over the pavement; Carter v. Le Blanc Lumber Co., La.App., 1948, , involved a truck loaded with logs moving at night on the paved highway without tail lights, clearance lights or flags; the truck driver in Capitol Transport Co., Inc. v. Blossman, Inc., 1951,
-
Vidrine v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co.
105 So. 2d 279
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
Grantham v. Smith, [ 18 La.App.
-
Le Blanc v. SOUTHERN FARM BUREAU CAS. INC. CO.
104 So. 2d 279
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
App., , Hicks v. Tilquit, La.
-
Mershon v. Cutrer
85 So. 2d 639
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
1st Cir. 1948, —The Court of Appeals found that the character, nature and size of the object must be considered, and found that the driver was not negligent in colliding i with an unlighted truck; “Gaiennie v. Cooperative Produce Co., Inc., 1940, 196 La.
-
King v. Risdon & WE Holoman Lumber Company
76 So. 2d 548
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1954
Thus Rea v. Dow Motor Co., La.App., 1948, , was an action where plaintiff traveling at a speed of twenty miles per hour in the rain, ran into a parked military car without lights, which was olive green in color and a portion of it extended over the pavement; Carter v. Le Blanc Lumber Co., La.App., 1948, , involved a truck loaded with logs moving at night on the paved highway without tail lights, clearance lights or flags; the truck driver in Capitol Transport Co., Inc. v. Blossman, Inc., 1951, 2
-
Carlson v. Eckert
73 So. 2d 638
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
App., ; Carter v. LeBlanc Lumber Co., La.App., ; and Emmco Ins.
-
Martin v. Bruchhaus
74 So. 2d 316
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
660 ; Carter v. LeBlanc Lumber Co., La.App., ; Wiggins v. American Surety Co. of New York, La.App., , and considering the pleadings, the law and the evidence it is felt that an award of $1,200 would be ample and just compensation for the physical and mental pain, suffering, anguish, embarrassment, inconvenience and discomfort.
-
Watts v. Spikes
60 So. 2d 242
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
the Court stated: *245 “ ‘We conclude therefore that an affirmative defense, presentéd through exceptions or motions tried or triable only on the face of the petition, should not be sustained unless the allegations of the petition exclude every reasonable hypothesis other than the premise upon which the defense is based.’ ” In the case of Carter v. Le Blanc Lumber Co., La.App., , which involved a collision between a log truck having no tail lights or flares or clearance lights of any kind being
-
White v. State Farm Mut. Ins.
55 So. 2d 75
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Co., La.App., and Cassar et al. v. Mansfield Lbr.
-
Woodall v. Southern Scrap Material Co.
40 So. 2d 495
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
App. , and Rea v. Dow Motor Company, La.
-
Crimp v. Le Blanc Lumber Co.
37 So. 2d 476
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
App., , the judgment appealed from is affirmed, at defendants' costs.