laid down rule in Louisiana

1985In Fraser v. Ameling, 277 So.2d 633 (La.1973), our Supreme Court, citing their prior decision of Pursell v. Kelly, 244 La. 323 , 152 So.2d 36 (1963), stated: "In Pursell v. Kelly, 244 La. 323 , 152 So.2d 36 (1963), this court laid down the test to be applied when a reduction in the purchase price is sought as a result of damage caused by termites.

1985In Fraser v. Ameling, 277 So.2d 633 (La.1973), our Supreme Court, citing their prior decision of Pursell v. Kelly, 244 La. 323 , 152 So.2d 36 (1963), stated: "In Pursell v. Kelly, 244 La. 323 , 152 So.2d 36 (1963), this court laid down the test to be applied when a reduction in the purchase price is sought as a result of damage caused by termites.

1958In the leading case of Kern v. Southport Mill, 174 La. 432 , 141 So. 19, 20 , this Court laid down the test for determining whether injuries to or death of an employee is sustained while he is “performing services arising out of and incidental to his employment in the course of his employer’s trade, business or occupation * * * ” as required by R.S. 23 :1035.

1958In the leading case of Kern v. Southport Mill, 174 La. 432 , 141 So. 19, 20 , this Court laid down the test for determining whether injuries to or death of an employee is sustained while he is “performing services arising out of and incidental to his employment in the course of his employer’s trade, business or occupation * * * ” as required by R.S. 23 :1035.

1951As was well said by Justice Higgins in the opinion in Reeves v. Globe Indemnity Co., 185 La. 42 , 168 So. 488 , 491: “ ‘This conclusion is not only in accord with the weight of authority, but consonant with construction of equity and the modem trend of liberality in upholding substantive rights instead of subtle technicalities.’ “The above case to which we refer is, of course, the outstanding authority in support of the principle of permitting amendments, and in that case the court laid down the principle that a petition which was sufficient to apprise the insurer of the nature of the demand m

1951As was well said by Justice Higgins in the opinion in Reeves v. Globe Indemnity Co., 185 La. 42 , 168 So. 488 , 491: “ ‘This conclusion is not only in accord with the weight of authority, but consonant with construction of equity and the modem trend of liberality in upholding substantive rights instead of subtle technicalities.’ “The above case to which we refer is, of course, the outstanding authority in support of the principle of permitting amendments, and in that case the court laid down the principle that a petition which was sufficient to apprise the insurer of the nature of the demand m

1985In Fraser v. Ameling, 277 So.2d 633 (La.1973), our Supreme Court, citing their prior decision of Pursell v. Kelly, 244 La. 323 , 152 So.2d 36 (1963), stated: "In Pursell v. Kelly, 244 La. 323 , 152 So.2d 36 (1963), this court laid down the test to be applied when a reduction in the purchase price is sought as a result of damage caused by termites.

1958It was there held that services arise out of and are incidental to the employment whenever the employment calls for the services that are being performed at the time of the accident and that, whenever the employer directs the employee to render any particular service, “* * * he, at least (that is to say, the employer himself), is in no position any longer to deny that the services thus requested arise out of and are incidental to the employment.” This test was recently applied in Dobson v. Standard Accident Insurance Co., 228 La. 837 , 84 So.2d 210 , where it was held that an employer, who has

1958It was there held that services arise out of and are incidental to the employment whenever the employment calls for the services that are being performed at the time of the accident and that, whenever the employer directs the employee to render any particular service, “* * * he, at least (that is to say, the employer himself), is in no position any longer to deny that the services thus requested arise out of and are incidental to the employment.” This test was recently applied in Dobson v. Standard Accident Insurance Co., 228 La. 837 , 84 So.2d 210 , where it was held that an employer, who has

1957In the case of Amyx v. Henry & Hall, 227 La. 364 , 79 So.2d 483 this court laid down the test of an independent contract relationship.

1957In the case of Amyx v. Henry & Hall, 227 La. 364 , 79 So.2d 483 this court laid down the test of an independent contract relationship.

1952This is made clear in a comment by the same author regarding the Frost-Johnson Lumber Company case in International Paper Company v. Louisiana Central Lumber Company, 202 La. 621 , 12 So.2d 659, 663 .

1952This is made clear in a comment by the same author regarding the Frost-Johnson Lumber Company case in International Paper Company v. Louisiana Central Lumber Company, 202 La. 621 , 12 So.2d 659, 663 .

1948App. 148 , 130 So. 821 , in which this Court laid down the principle that it is the duty of the driver, when the vision of the road ahead is obstructed, whether by curve or road contour or anything else, to bring his car down to such speed as to have it under such control that he can stop within the distance that he can see an obstruction ahead.

1948App. 221 , 133 So. 823, 824 , Judge Taliaferro as the organ of this Court laid down the rule and noted the exception to the literal interpretation of Civil Code, Article 2278, which we consider applicable to the case before us: "The weight of authority interpreting statutes of this kind is to this effect: That, if the agreement to pay the obligation of a third person is merely a collateral undertaking, it comes within the statute of frauds; but, if such agreement is independent, not made primarily to answer for another, but is impelled from pecuniary or business motives, accruing to the promis

1944With the large number of colored male residents of the county who are literate, and in the absence of any countervailing testimony, there is no room for inference that there are not among them householders of good moral character, who can read and write, qualified and available for grand jury service. *721 “More than sixty years ago, in Neal v. Delaware, supra, 103 U.S. 397 , 26 L.Ed. 567 [574], a case substantially like the present, this Court laid down the rule which we think controlling here: ‘The showing thus made, including, as it did, the fact (so generally known that the court felt obli

1944It was, we think, under all the circumstances, a violent presumption which the State court indulged, that such uniform exclusion of that race from juries, during a period of many years, was solely because, in the judgment of those officers, fairly exercised, the black race in Delaware were utterly disqualified, by want of intelligence, experience, or moral integrity, to sit on juries.’ “And recently we held in Pierre v. Louisiana [ 306 U.S. 354 , 59 S.Ct. 536 , 83 L.Ed. 757 ], supra, that a prima facie case of race discrimination had been established where there had been a long-continued failu

1944It was, we think, under all the circumstances, a violent presumption which the State court indulged, that such uniform exclusion of that race from juries, during a period of many years, was solely because, in the judgment of those officers, fairly exercised, the black race in Delaware were utterly disqualified, by want of intelligence, experience, or moral integrity, to sit on juries.’ “And recently we held in Pierre v. Louisiana [ 306 U.S. 354 , 59 S.Ct. 536 , 83 L.Ed. 757 ], supra, that a prima facie case of race discrimination had been established where there had been a long-continued failu

1942In the recent case of Sanderson et al. v. Frost, 198 La. 295 , 3 So.2d 626 , the court laid down the rule that a pleader is not estopped by judicial allegations which have neither deceived nor damaged anyone.

1942In the recent case of Sanderson et al. v. Frost, 198 La. 295 , 3 So.2d 626 , the court laid down the rule that a pleader is not estopped by judicial allegations which have neither deceived nor damaged anyone.

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938In the case of State v. Coleman, 158 La. 755 , 104 So. 705 this court laid down the doctrine that when there is a discrepancy in the statement between the trial judge and counsel for a defendant, the statement made by the trial judge in his per curiam to a bill reserved, under the well-settled jurisprudence, must be accepted.

1938In the case of State v. Coleman, 158 La. 755 , 104 So. 705 this court laid down the doctrine that when there is a discrepancy in the statement between the trial judge and counsel for a defendant, the statement made by the trial judge in his per curiam to a bill reserved, under the well-settled jurisprudence, must be accepted.

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938In the case of State v. Heymann, 178 La. 479 , 151 So. 901 , this court laid down the doctrine that the operation or managing of an office building, whether by the owner or by a lessee of the building, is now well recognized as a carrying on of an occupation or business, citing Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 , 31 S.Ct. 342 , at page 357, 55 L.Ed. 389 , Ann.Cas.1912B, 1312; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144 , 44 S.Ct. 462 , at page 468, 68 L.Ed. 949 ; Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 , 31 S.Ct. 361 , 55 L.Ed. 428 .

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1938It makes but little difference whether this be an excavation, Kendall v. City of Des Moines, 183 Iowa, 866 , 167 N. W. 684 , an automobile, Rice v. Foley, 98 Conn. 372 , 119 A. 353 , a railroad crossing gate, Record v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 76 N.J.Law, 800 , 72 A. 62 , or a freight car, Mann v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 43 Ga.App. 708 , 160 S.E. 131 . * * * In Witherly v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co., supra, this court laid down the rule, page 7 of 131 Me., 158 A. 362, 363 , that: ‘Negligent obstruction of a highway by a standing train is determined by whether, under all the circ

1905This court laid down the rule of interpretation in the case of State of Louisiana v. Emile Dalon, 35 La.