green
Positive treatment
Issue: transfer ruleLA ↗
Issue: exhaustive analysisLA ↗
Issue: deciding exceptionLA ↗
2.6 score
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Toce Oil Co. v. Central Industries, Inc.
See the definitive cases of Desormeaux v. Central Industries, Inc., 333 So.2d 431 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1976), writ denied, 337 So.2d 225 (La.1976); and Robins Dry dock & Repair Company v. Flint, 275 U.S. 303 , 48 S.Ct. 134 , 72 L.Ed. 290 (1927).
discussed
Cited "see"
PPG Industries, Inc. v. Bean Dredging
See, for example, Desormeaux v. Central Industries, Inc., 333 So.2d 431 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1976), cert. denied 337 So.2d 225 (La.1976); Messina v. Sheraton Corporation of America, 291 So.2d 829 (La.App. 4th Cir.1974).
cited
Cited "see"
Smith v. Livingston Parish Police Jury
See Desormeaux v. Central Industries, Inc., 333 So.2d 431 (La.App. 3d Cir.1976), writ denied 337 So.2d 225 (La.1976) and Lake Charles F.F.A.L.U.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Philip DESORMEAUX
v.
CENTRAL INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
v.
CENTRAL INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.
Summers.
Published
Writ denied. The result is correct.
SUMMERS, J., the writ should be granted.
TATE, J. Although the issue is correctly decided under existing jurisprudence, this court should re-examine Forcum-James Co., Inc. v. Duke Transporation Co., 231 La. 953, 93 So.2d 228 (1957) insofar as applicable to situations such as is here presented.