DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Stamps v. Henderson, 25 So. 2d 305.

25 citing documents.

  • Collins v. Allstate Insurance 264 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    (2d La.App., 1942); (2d La.App., 1946); Haywood v. Fidelity Mutual Ins.
  • Faia v. Landry 249 So. 2d 317 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1971
    3rd Cir. 1961); (La.App.
  • Moran v. Allstate Insurance 246 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
    Cir. 1937); Haywood v. Fidelity *696 Mutual Insurance Company of Indianapolis, Indiana, and other cases.
  • Woods v. Cappo 232 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
    (2d La.App., 1942); (2d La.App., 1946); Haywood v. Fidelity Mutual Ins.
  • Sutton v. Rogers 222 So. 2d 504 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1969
    Co. of Indianapolis, Cimo v. Karstendiek, 173 So.
  • Herrin v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 217 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
  • Bryan v. Durr 209 So. 2d 548 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
  • Morettini v. Martinez 205 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    In Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., , the Court, referring to a motorist, said: “ * * * a greater degree of care is required of them when children are seen along the road.” (Note again the words “are seen”).
  • Davis v. Guillot 203 So. 2d 919 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., ; Hughes et al. v. Gill, La.App., ; Guillory v. Lemoine, La.App., .
  • White v. Hanover Insurance Company 201 So. 2d 201 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    Haywood v. Fidelity Mutual Insurance Company, La.App., , Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., ; Cormier v. Sinegal, La.App., .
  • Tate v. Hill 197 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    513 , L.R.A.1918A; Haywood v. Fidelity Mutual Insurance Co. of Indianapolis, La.App., ; Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., ; Ates v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins.
  • Ates v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 191 So. 2d 332 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
    2 Cir., 1946, ; , La.App.
  • Helgason v. Hartford Insurance Company 187 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1966
    2 Cir., 1946) and cases cited.
  • Campo v. Vampran 183 So. 2d 57 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
    Plaintiff cites the case of Stamps v. Henderson (1946) La.App., ; Walker v. Jarnevich (1958) La.App., ; Burnaman v. LaPrairie (1962) La.App., ; and Danna v. London Guarantee & Accident Company (1962) La.App., , as authority for the above statement of law.
  • Distinguished Goff v. Carlino 181 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
  • Danna v. London Guarantee & Accident Company 147 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1962
  • Layfield v. Bourgeois 142 So. 2d 799 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
    Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., ; Hughes et al. v. Gill, La.App., ; Guillory v. Lemoine, La.App., .
  • Burnaman v. La Prairie 140 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
    572 ; Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., ; Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins.
  • Walker v. Jarnevich 102 So. 2d 770 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    App., ; Doyle v. Nelson, La.
  • Brown v. Liberty Mutual Insurance 96 So. 2d 922 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    888 ; Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., ; Peperone v. Lee, La.App., 16 So.
  • Guillory v. Lemoine 87 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    481 ], Stamps v. Henderson [La.App.1946, ].
  • Jenkins v. Firemen's Insurance Co. of Newark, NJ 83 So. 2d 494 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1955
    *498 In Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., , we held a motorist liable for injuries sustained by a nine and a half year old child on the ground that he had violated the high degree of care which is required in the operation of a motor vehicle on the highway in close proximity to children.
  • Matthews v. Franklin 74 So. 2d 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
    737 ; ; Abate v. Hindese, [Hirdes, 9 La.App.
  • Rainwater v. Boatright 61 So. 2d 212 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1952
    In Stamps v. Henderson, La.App., 1946, , it is said: "The jurisprudence of this state teems with decisions discussing and defining the duty of motorists toward children on sidewalks and along or near to roadsides.
  • Haywood v. Fidelity Mut. Ins. Co. of Indianapolis 47 So. 2d 59 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
    s to be incapable of contributory negligence, which was not even pleaded," meant that the Supreme Court has held that in a case of this kind a child of 11 years, 1 , even though in that case the defendant was held free of negligence.