DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., 191 So. 607.

17 citing documents.

  • Franklin v. Haughton Timber Co. 377 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
  • Windham v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford 337 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
    297 , ; Fackrell v. Gulley, La.App., ; Longoria v. Progressive Mutual Insurance Company, La.App., ; Raney v. McDaniel, La.App., ; Simms v. Lawrence Bros., La.App., ; Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., .
  • Fackrell v. Gulley 246 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
    297 , (1959), which latter case cites Mabry v. Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York
  • Longoria v. Progressive Mutual Insurance 204 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    (La.App., 2d Cir. 1939 — cert.
  • Frazier v. Calhoun 165 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    2d Cir., 1939, (writs denied).
  • Richardson v. Joseph 165 So. 2d 321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
    836 ; Mayberry et al. v. McDuffie et al., La.App.2d Cir., 1961, ; Simms v. Lawrence Bros. et al., La.App.2d Cir., 1954, ; Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co. et al., La.App.2d Cir., 1939, (writ denied) ; Antoine v. Louisiana Highway Commission et al., La.App.1st Cir., 1939, 188 So.
  • Mayberry v. McDuffie 135 So. 2d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    2d Cir., 1939, (writs denied); Simms v. Lawrence Bros., La.App.
  • Cofield v. Burgdorf 115 So. 2d 357 La. 1959
    See Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., .
  • Cofield v. Burgdorf 111 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
    473 ; Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., ; Le Blanc v. Olivier, La.App., ; ; Houlton v. Nichols Truck Line, La.App., ; Simms v. Lawrence Bros., La.App., .
  • Himes v. Avinger 85 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    this court, through the late Judge Taliaferro as the author of the opinion, in referring to a salesman who at the time of an accident was engaged in his employer's business and performing duties he was employed to perform, the employer having a right to direct the salesman's action, stated: "It is fundamental t
  • Simms v. Lawrence Bros. 72 So. 2d 538 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1954
    This court recognized these principles in the case of Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., 610 , wherein it was stated: "Ownership of a motor vehicle at fault in an accident, does not necessarily cinch responsibility for results upon the owner; but an inference of responsibility arises from proof of such ownership.
  • Simms v. Lawrence Bros. 72 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    This court recognized these principles in the case of Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., 610 , wherein it was stated: “Ownership of a motor vehicle at fault in an accident, does not necessarily cinch responsibility for results upon the owner; but an inference of responsibility arises from proof of such ownership.
  • Amyx v. Henry 69 So. 2d 69 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    713 ; Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., 1939, ; Olano v. Leathers, La.App., 1941, ; Collins v. Smith, La.App., 1943, ; Deason v. Coal Operators Casualty Co., La.App., 1950, ; Sones v. Southern Lumber Company, Miss., 1952, ; Doyle v. Royal Indemnity Co., La.App., 1953, .
  • Doyle v. Royal Indemnity Co. 65 So. 2d 659 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
    hey did in hauling the shells, and counsel maintain that Edwards could have routed them over any road he pleased, no matter how long, the fact is that Leathers, at considerable expense to himself kept up a public road for - the purpose of hauling the shells and that leaves us with the impression that that is the road he intended they had to use: “In Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Company, La.App., , the Court stated: ‘It is fundamental to the existence of this relationship (that of independent co
  • Moore v. Cochran Franklin Co. 5 So. 2d 33 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
  • Olano v. Leathers 2 So. 2d 486 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1941
    In Coon v. Monroe Scrap Material Co., La.App., , the Court stated: "It is fundamental to the existence of this relationship [that of independent contractor] that there must be absolute independence of action on the part of the contractor in the execution of the work assumed by him.
  • Richardson v. Monroe Scrap Material Co. 191 So. 612 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
    v. Monroe Scrap Material Company et al., , No. 5901 on the .docket of this Court, decided today.