Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite James v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., 150 So. 9.

23 citing documents.

Orgeron v. Sweatman 367 So. 2d 1199 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Lea v. Baumann Surgical Supplies Inc. 321 So. 2d 844 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
328 ; Graffagnini v. George Engine Company, Inc., La.App., , and James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Valence v. State 280 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
92 ; James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Blanchard v. Ogima 215 So. 2d 902 La. 1968
James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Little v. Caterpillar Tractor Company 169 So. 2d 654 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Stubblefield v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 157 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
However, as it was said in James, et al. v. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Harding v. Christiana 103 So. 2d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
James v. J. S. Williams & Son, 1933, , 150 So.
Rhea v. Farrington 78 So. 2d 47 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
In James v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., 1933, , 150 So.
Dominguez v. American Casualty Co. 46 So. 2d 744 La. 1950
814 ; James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Warren v. Globe Indemnity Co. 46 So. 2d 66 La. 1950
409 ; and compare James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Stanley v. Cryer Drilling Co. 36 So. 2d 9 La. 1948
James et al. v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Waits v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of North America 33 So. 2d 554 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
James et al. v. J. S. Williams Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Stanley v. Cryer Drilling Co. 29 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
James et al. v. J. S. Williams Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Williamson v. De Soto Wholesale Grocery Co. 16 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
Williams Sons, Inc., , 150 So.
G'sell v. Cassagne 12 So. 2d 51 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
Antoine v. Louisiana Highway Commission 188 So. 443 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
Counsel for the Commission cite and rely on the case of James et al., v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Morris v. Thomas 188 So. 166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
In James v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Roy v. Houlihan 182 So. 333 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
art. 2320; James et al. v. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Matheny v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 181 So. 647 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
servant, having completed the purpose for which he turned aside, is returning to resume his duties, he is, whilst so returning, engaged in the business of his master.” Justice Odom, in James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Parks v. Hall 179 So. 868 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
that Mitchell had abandoned his employer’s business the very moment that he started on the mission for Volney Mitchell, the burden was with the plaintiff to show that the independent errand had been accomplished, and that the servant was returning to resume his service with his employer; and this the plaintiff has failed to do.” The comparatively recent case of James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Waddell v. Langlois 158 So. 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
308 , is, we think, a sufficient reference as to the law of this state on that subject, but we also have in mind the decision of the Supreme Court in James et al. v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.
Jones v. Shehee Ford Wagon & Harness Co. 157 So. 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
If the service be performed in an unlawful, or even a criminal manner, the master is liable, so long as the thing done forms a part of the servant’s duties.” In the case of James v. J. S. Williams & Son, , 150 So.
Middleton v. Humble 154 So. 400 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
James v. J. S. Williams & Son, Inc., , 150 So.