Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite White v. Taylor, 5 So. 2d 337.
- Warren A. Rave v. Wampold Companies La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
-
Rave v. Wampold Companies
944 So. 2d 847
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
App. 1 Cir.1949); (La.App.
- Gales v. Gold Bond Bldg. Products 493 So. 2d 611 La. 1986
-
Owens v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
307 So. 2d 313
La. 1975
73 (1951); Brock v. Jones & Laughlin Supply Co., certiorari denied.
-
Scott v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company
302 So. 2d 641
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
1st Cir. 1951); (La.App.
- Stockstill v. Bituminous Casualty Corporation 144 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
-
Fontenot v. Great American Indemnity Company
127 So. 2d 822
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
214 , ; Brock v. Jones and Laughlin Supply Company, La.App., ; White v. Taylor, La.App., ; Stansbury v. National Auto and Casualty Insurance Company, La.App., .
-
Finley v. Hardware Mutual Insurance Company
110 So. 2d 583
La. 1959
See White v. Taylor, La.App., and Brock v. *225 Jones & Laughlin Supply Co., La.App., .
- Bynum v. Maryland Casualty Company 102 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
-
Jackson v. H. B. Bruser & Royal Indemnity Co.
96 So. 2d 850
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
*853 Defendants, Bruser et al., also cited White v. Taylor, La.App., .
-
Wright v. Urania Lumber Co.
95 So. 2d 838
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
Co., La.App., ; White v. Taylor, La.App., .
-
Stansbury v. National Auto. & Cas. Ins. Co.
52 So. 2d 300
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
In White v. Taylor, La.App., (CA-2, 1941), the court said that where a first injury did not cause total disability but a second injury two days later while working for another employer, combined with the first injury, did totally disable the employee, it was proper to hold both employers and both insurers liable in solido.
-
Brock v. Jones Laughlin Supply Co.
39 So. 2d 904
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
which presents this difference; that there, there were two separate and distinct accidents whilst the employee was working for each of the two defendants and the court held that it took the combination of both accidents to totally disable him at the time he became disabled on the date of the second accident.