DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., 196 So. 23.

43 citing documents.

  • Tate v. Gaylord Container 720 So. 2d 24 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
  • Nelson v. Roadway Exp., Inc. 588 So. 2d 350 La. 1991
  • Norton ex rel. Norton v. Hale 505 So. 2d 869 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
    399 (1922); Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Jacks v. Banister Pipelines America 418 So. 2d 524 La. 1982
  • Day v. Campbell-Grosjean Roofing & Sheet Metal Corp. 256 So. 2d 105 La. 1971
  • Norred v. Travelers Insurance Company 236 So. 2d 637 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1970
  • Lum v. Employers Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. of Wis. 216 So. 2d 889 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1968
  • Comoletti v. Ideal Cement Company 147 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    We said: "`There is no doubt that the acute lead poisoning from which the plaintiff suffered was unexpected and unforeseen and happened suddenly or violently with or without human fault and produced at the time objective symptoms.'" "In Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Vidrine v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. 137 So. 2d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    In Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Thornton v. F. Strauss & Son, Inc. 123 So. 2d 885 La. 1960
    Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Parish v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York 124 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1960
    Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Broussard v. Dumas Chevrolet Company 120 So. 2d 863 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    Robichaux *867 v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Livaccari v. FIDELITY & CASULATY CO. OF NEW YORK 118 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    See Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Cofield v. Burgdorf 115 So. 2d 357 La. 1959
    To these citations we add Robichaux v. Realty Operators, 1940, , 196 So.
  • Valentine v. Godchaux Sugars, Inc. 90 So. 2d 442 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1956
    We said: “There , is no doubt that the acute lead poisoning from which the plaintiff suffered was unexpected and unforeseen and happened suddenly or violently with or without human fault and produced at the time objective symptoms.” In Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Succession of Brower 84 So. 2d 191 La. 1955
  • Williams v. Harris 77 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    s 23:1021 (1) reads: “(1) ‘Accident’ means an unexpected or unforeseen event happening suddenly or violently, with or without human fault and producing at the time objective symptoms of an injury.” Our jurisprudence has held it is not necessary that an accident should seem at the time of its occurrence serious in order to come within this definition, , 196 So.
  • Smith v. International Paper Co. 73 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1954
    As was aptly said by the Supreme Court in Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Griffin v. Catherine Sugar Co. 54 So. 2d 121 La. 1951
    See Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Savoie v. Dupuy 50 So. 2d 817 La. 1950
    40 and Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Hebert v. Fifteen Oil Co. 46 So. 2d 328 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
    See Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Griffin v. Catherine Sugar Co. 42 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
    As aforesaid, the defendant company was engaged in a business consisting of two distinct departments: (1) that of growing sugar cane, and (2) that of manufacturing sugar from sugar cane, , 196 So.
  • Waller v. Stone Webster Engineering Corporation 42 So. 2d 872 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
    Nevertheless, plaintiff feels that the case of Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Cook v. M. J. Walsh Boiler Scaling Co. 40 So. 2d 655 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
  • Donnell v. Gray 41 So. 2d 66 La. 1949
    6 , Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Richardson v. American Employers' Ins. Co. 31 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
    399 ; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Custer v. Higgins Industries 24 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
    In Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Edwards v. Shreveport Creosoting Co. 21 So. 2d 878 La. 1945
    9 , it was held that “ * * * ‘after a writ of review has been granted, we are obliged to decide the questions of fact as well as the questions of law that are tendered for decision; and to that end it is-declared in the Constitution, Article 7, Section 11, that we shall have “the same power and authority in the case” as if it had come here directly by appeal.’ Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Jones v. Chicago Mill Lumber Co. 15 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
    806 ; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Hester v. Tremont Lumber Co. 15 So. 2d 94 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
    *Page 97 "In the case of Robichaux v. Realty Operators [ ], 196 So.
  • Madison Lumber Co. v. Helm 13 So. 2d 349 La. 1943
    to it for review.” However, “after a writ of review has been granted, we are obliged to decide the questions of fact as well as the questions of law that are tendered for decision; and to that end it is declared in the Constitution, Article 7, Section 11, that we shall have ‘the same power and authority in the case’ as if it had come here directly by appeal.” Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Mitchell v. Littlejohn Transp. Co. 10 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    169 ; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Rhodus v. American Employers Ins. Co. 9 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    With reference to the original claim, however, the case presents a very difficult and close question, , 196 So.
  • Roper v. Brooks 9 So. 2d 485 La. 1942
    Section 2, Act 191 of 1898; Article VII, § 11 of the Constitution of 1921, , 196 So.
  • Johnson v. Tregle 8 So. 2d 755 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    169 ; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Collins v. Spielman 8 So. 2d 608 La. 1942
    399 ; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Bruns v. Bemis Bros. Bag Co. 8 So. 2d 142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    See, also, Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Burks v. Central Surety Ins. Co. 6 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    "I am familiar with the rule of law laid down in Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc. [ ], 196 So.
  • Lorch v. American Can Co. Southern 5 So. 2d 35 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    806 , and Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Hayes v. Barras 6 So. 2d 66 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    In the case of Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Robinson v. Atkinson 3 So. 2d 604 La. 1941
    399 , and Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.
  • Williams v. Westdale Corporation 3 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    Defendant, in support of the contention that its farming business is non-hazardous and therefore, no compensation is due by it to plaintiff, cites and relies upon the Employers' Liability Act and the following cases: , 196 So.
  • Robinson v. Atkinson 3 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    *Page 603 159; DeLony v. Lane, supra; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, Inc., , 196 So.