Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., 179 So. 6.

70 citing documents.

Daigle v. Higgins Industries 28 So. 2d 381 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
The case of Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
St. Alexandre v. Texas Co. 28 So. 2d 385 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
We base our conclusion in this regard on what was said by the Supreme Court in Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., et al., , 179 So.
Mitchell v. T. J. Moss Tie Co. 27 So. 2d 385 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
Stovall v. American Employers Ins. Co. 26 So. 2d 321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
App., ; Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Hecht v. Higgins Industries 25 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
There we said: "* * * were it not for the holding in Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars Company, supra, [ , 179 So.
Breland v. Rainold-Van Denburgh 24 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
However, our Brother below felt that the holding in Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., et al., , 179 So.
Robinson v. Frost Hardwood Floors 25 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., et al., , 179 So.
Ranatza v. Higgins Industries, Inc. 23 So. 2d 45 La. 1945
Falgoust v. Maryland Casualty Co. 22 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
Butzman v. Delta Shipbuilding Co. 21 So. 2d 80 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
Holliday v. Martin Veneer Co. 20 So. 2d 173 La. 1944
The case of Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Ranatza v. Higgins Industries 18 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1944
9 ; Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Holliday v. Martin Veneer Co. 15 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
The case of Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
McKenzie v. Standard Motor Car Co. 15 So. 2d 115 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Bruns v. Bemis Bros. Bag Co. 8 So. 2d 142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
608 ; Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Washington v. Holmes Barnes 4 So. 2d 51 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
241 ; and Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., et al., , 179 So.
Brownfield v. Southern Amusement Co. 198 So. 656 La. 1940
In addition to the Byas case, plaintiff relies on the case of Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Brownfield v. Southern Amusement Co. 198 So. 656 La. 1940
In addition to the Byas case, plaintiff relies on the case of Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.
Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc. 185 So. 101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
425 , and the judgment of the Supreme Court amending this judgment rendered on January 10, 1938, , 179 So.
Gray v. Tremont Lumber Co. 185 So. 314 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
Plaintiff urges that her position is supported by the recent case of Stieffel v. Valentine Sugars, Inc., , 179 So.