Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Jackson v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co., 29 So. 2d 177.

18 citing documents.

State ex rel. Division of Administration, Office of Risk Management v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. 56 So. 3d 1236 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Mansour v. State ex rel. State Employees Group Benefits Program 694 So. 2d 1096 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Co., , (1946), even in light of policy language that no action would lie unless written notice was given as soon as practicable, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that coverage was not precluded, after considering numerous factors, including prejudice to the insurer by the delay, the good faith of the insu
Fakouri v. Insurance Co. of North America 378 So. 2d 1083 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
Moskau v. Insurance Co. of North America 366 So. 2d 1004 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Ellerson v. Scott 320 So. 2d 527 La. 1975
Insurance Co., , (1946).
JC BARNES v. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. 308 So. 2d 326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
the court, in considering a notice delay of eight-two days, held there was no substantial prejudice to defendants.
Suire v. Combined Insurance Company of America 290 So. 2d 271 La. 1974
Co., , (1946), we held: "Each case involving delayed notices must stand upon its own facts and circumstances.
Heimbaugh v. Federal Insurance Company 281 So. 2d 839 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Co., , (1946), the Supreme Court clearly stated that each case involving delayed notice must stand on its own facts and that the Court may consider the good faith of the insured *845 and injured party, and the existence of any special circumstances, especially those indicating fraud and collusion.
Davis v. Allstate Insurance Company 272 So. 2d 458 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1973
Co., , (1946) wherein the court was concerned with the single proposition as to whether the insurance company was relieved from liability because of a delay of 82 days in its receipt of notice of the occurrence of an accident, the court appropriately observed: "Each case involving delayed notices must sta
Miller v. Marcantel 221 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
Co., , , to the effect that an insurer could not rely upon delayed notice in the absence of prejudice or bad-faith circumstances indicating fraud or collusion.
Reagan v. Mid-Continent Underwriters, Inc. 150 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1963
Co., , ; Jones v. Shehee-Ford Wagon & Harness Co., Inc., 183 La.
Howard v. Early Chevrolet-Pontiac-Cadillac, Inc. 150 So. 2d 309 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1963
v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, , 29 So.
Churchman v. Ingram 56 So. 2d 297 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1951
Hayward v. Carolina Ins. Co. 51 So. 2d 405 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Co., , , held: “Whether liability insurer is relieved of liability by delay in giving notice of accident depends upon length of.
West v. Monroe Bakery, Inc. 46 So. 2d 122 La. 1950
Co., 1946, , 29 So.2d l77.
Reid v. Monticello 44 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
West v. Monroe Bakery 39 So. 2d 620 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1948
v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., , , the Supreme Court held that — under the facts and circumstances of that case — the eighty-two day delay of the insured in giving notice did not cut off the right of the injured party to recover against the insurer .
Jackson v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. 32 So. 2d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947