Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., 151 So. 822.

27 citing documents.

Robbins v. Caraway-Rhodes Veterinary Hospital 299 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
758 (La.App., Orl., 1935); Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Company, (La.
Hall v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 221 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
943 , ; Honeycutt v. Sears, Roebuck & Company, La.App., ; Allen v. Travelers Insurance Company, La.App., ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Company, La.App., .
Honeycutt v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 146 So. 2d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
App., 2 Cir., 1934), ; Scott v. Dalton Company, Inc. (La.App., 1 Cir., 1941), ; Goodman v. National Casualty Company (La.App., 1 Cir., 1943), ; Wells v. Morgan & Lindsey, Inc. (La.App., 1 Cir., 1949), ; Fields v.. General Casualty Company of America, 216 La.
Harris v. Primos 98 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
App., , plaintiff sought to recover compensation for accidental injuries allegedly received by him while in the defendant’s employ but failed to allege that defendant’s business is hazardous within the terms of the statute.
Coleman v. Sears, Roebuck & Company 83 So. 2d 469 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1955
Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., ; Scott v. Dalton Co., Inc., La.App., ; Goodman v. National Casualty Co., La.App., ; Wells v. Morgan & Lindsey, Inc., La.App., ; Fields v. General Cas.
Harrington v. Franklin's Stores Corp. of New Iberia 55 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
Plaintiff herein cites Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., , as authority that the installation of electric refrigerators makes the business of a retail merchant of these appliances hazardous.
Robin v. Brandin 45 So. 2d 423 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
ce of the electric sign which hung over the front of the hotel and an electric deep freeze unit was a part of the hotel business and that as the plaintiff took care of this sign by changing the globes regularly this made the business hazardous and plaintiff’s, duties in connection therewith entitled him to recover compensation under the authority of Stockstill v. Sears Roebuck & Co., La.App., .
Turner v. Maryland Casualty Co. 44 So. 2d 374 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1950
691 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., ; McQueen v. Tremont Lumber Co., La.App., 151 So.
Richardson v. American Employers' Ins. Co. 31 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
App., , and Staples v. Henderson Jersey Farms, Inc., La.
Hogan v. T. J. Moss Tie Co. 27 So. 2d 131 La. 1946
See Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck Co., La.App., ; Williams v. O. K. Construction Co., La.App., 151 So.
Collins v. Spielman 8 So. 2d 608 La. 1942
303 ; Rayburn v. De Moss, supra; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., , and Staples v. Henderson Jersey Farms, Inc., La.App., 181 So.
Bruns v. Bemis Bros. Bag Co. 8 So. 2d 142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
498, 499 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck and Company, La.App., ; Wright v. Louisiana Ice and Utilities Company, 14 La.App.
Stephens v. Catalano 7 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
782 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck Company, La.App., ; Atkins v. Holsum Cafeteria, Inc., La.App., 159 So.
Franz v. Sun Indemnity Co. of New York 7 So. 2d 636 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
271 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck Co., La.App., ; De Lony v. Lane, La.App., 155 So.
Kirby v. Terminal Paper Bag Co., Inc. 6 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
691 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck Company, La.App., ; Clark v. Alexandria Cooperage Lumber Company, 157 La.
Scott v. Dalton Co. 1 So. 2d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
Williams v. Westdale Corporation 3 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
414 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck Co., La.App., ; Robichaux v. Realty Operators, supra.
Robinson v. Atkinson 3 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
271 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck Co., La.App., ; DeLony v. Lane, La.App., 155 So.
Horton v. Western Union Telegraph Co. 200 So. 44 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., : Staples v. Henderson Jersey Farms, Inc., La.App., 181 So.
Allen v. Yantis 196 So. 530 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
691 ; Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., .
Gray v. Tremont Lumber Co. 185 So. 314 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
0 of 1914, as amended).” Plaintiff’s energetic counsel contends, as has been broadly held in several cases, that it is the character of the employer’s business with respect to it being hazardous, and not the nature of the particular duty of the employee, which determines employee’s right to compensation when injured in the course of his employment; and cites Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., , decided by this court, as well as several other cases.
Staples v. Henderson Jersey Farms, Inc. 181 So. 48 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
Stockstill v. Sears-Roebuck & Co., La.App., ; Kinnard v. Rice Drilling Co. et al., La.App., 172 So.
Rester v. Community Stores, Inc. 169 So. 183 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
the defendant was a merchant selling general hardware, electric refrigerators, and other merchandise.
McAllister v. Peoples Homestead & Saving Ass'n 164 So. 444 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
Brown v. Edwards (La.App.)
Overruled Brown v. Edwards 160 So. 173 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1935
App.) , the exception was overruled where again, as in the present case, there was an absence of allegation that the employer’s business was hazardous.
Faulkner v. Milner-Fuller, Inc. 154 So. 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
App.) , and in the present case, as was said in the Stockstill Case, we say: “It is not our purpose to prejudge the case on the merits, but simply to remand it for trial so that plaintiff may have the opportunity of presenting the facts he relies on to recover.” We think the alternative demand of plaintiff, as amplifie
Hollinsworth v. Crossett Lumber Co. 153 So. 722 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
App.) ; McQueen v. Tremont Lumber Co. (La.