Welch v. Robert Campbell, Inc., 321 So. 2d 523 (La. 1975). · Go Syfert
Welch v. Robert Campbell, Inc., 321 So. 2d 523 (La. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Williams (la, 1976-12-13)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Williams
La. · 1976 · confidence medium
See State v. Whitehurst, 319 So.2d 907 , 909 & n.1 (La. 1975); State v. Fisher, 321 So.2d 519, 520 (La.1975) (majority opinion, and concurrence of Justice Dixon); State v. Pierce, 321 So.2d 523, 524 (La.1975) (concurrence of Justice Dixon).
cited Cited "see" Niemann v. Crosby Development Co.
La. Ct. App. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Welch v. Robert Campbell, Inc., 316 So.2d 822, 825-26 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 321 So.2d 523 (La.1975).
cited Cited "see" State v. Young
La. Ct. App. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Pierce, 321 So.2d 523, 524 (La.1975) (Dixon, J., concurring).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Barney Edward WELCH
v.
ROBERT CAMPBELL, INC. and Southern Casualty Ins. Co.
56903.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
Oct 22, 1975.
321 So. 2d 523
Dixon.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

Denied. No error of law in the ruling of the Court of Appeal.

TATE, J., I respectfully dissent. A grave injustice through legal technicality has been caused this admittedly totally disabled employee. By the defendants' interrogatories Campbell's status as statutory employee was admitted. Although the trial court may have been in error in considering these interrogatories, since technically not admitted in evidence although filed as part of the court record prior to trial, remand should have been ordered rather than denying this admittedly disabled employee workmen's compensation to which he is clearly entitled. See Wade v. Calcasieu Paper Co., 229 La. 702, 86 So.2d 540 (1956), and many other decisions requiring this result in view of the paternalistic purposes of the compensation statute, including its provision that technical rules of evidence are relaxed. La.R.S. 23:1317.

DIXON, J., is of the opinion the court of appeal disposition of this case was clearly erroneous; the case should have been remanded to the district court.

CALOGERO, J., is of the opinion this writ should have been granted. Plaintiff's judgment for permanent and total workmen's compensation benefits awarded by a trial judge who obviously considered defendant's answer to interrogatories admitting the requisite statutory employer-employee relationship, has been taken away for the hypertechnical and in my view unsound legal reason that the interrogatories and answer filed in the trial court record before trial were not formally introduced in evidence.