Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Bradley v. Swift & Co., 119 So. 37.

15 citing documents.

Gonzales v. Succession of Medica 141 So. 2d 887 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
Flash v. Louisiana Western R. Company, supra; Bradley v. Swift & Company, , 119 So.
State v. Orleans Parish School Board 118 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
47 ; Bradley v. Swift & Co., , 119 So.
Caddo Contracting Co. v. Johnson 64 So. 2d 177 La. 1953
But they say that certain language supporting their position is contained in Balthazer v. Swift & Co., , 119 So.
Williams v. Jahncke Service, Inc. 55 So. 2d 668 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1951
Bradley v. Swift & Co., , 119 So.
Caddo Contracting Co. v. Johnson 54 So. 2d 827 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
1078 , ; Balthazer v. Swift & Co., , 119 So.
Tanner v. Beverly Country Club, Inc. 47 So. 2d 905 La. 1950
47 ; Bradley v. Swift & Co., , 119 So.
Williams v. Jahncke Service 38 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1949
This contention makes it necessary that we consider the very interesting question which was propounded in the case of Bradley v. Swift Co. (Balthazar v. Swift Co.), , 119 So.
Henderson v. City of Shreveport 26 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1946
Powell v. Paramount-Richards Theatres 22 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
Pepsodent Co. v. Krauss Co. 9 So. 2d 303 La. 1942
Bradley v. Swift & Company (Balthazer v. Swift & Co.), , 119 So.
Gremillion v. Louisiana Public Service Commission 172 So. 163 La. 1937
47 ]; Bradley v. Swift & Co., [ 119 So.
State v. Bisso Realty & Investment Co. 167 So. 87 La. 1936
539 ; Bradley v. Swift & Co., , 119 So.
Jones v. Dendinger, Inc. 147 So. 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
896 , reviewed by the Supreme Court , 119 So.
Dugas v. Gulf States Utilities Co. 145 So. 376 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
We are referred by counsel for plaintiff to the case of Bradley v. Swift & Co., , 119 So..
Bradley v. Swift & Co. 119 So. 906 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
The Supreme Court issued a writ of review and in its opinion handed down October 29, 1928, , the conclusion of this Court with respect to the widow, Elizabeth Bradley, was affirmed, but it was held that the mere existence of a surviving wife would not preclude the father from claiming compensation, it being necessary, under the compensation law, that the surviving widow be entitled to compensation in order