La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161 (2026)

Minors; prohibited employments

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

SUBPART B. EMPLOYMENT PRIVILEGES AND RESTRICTIONS

§161. Minors; prohibited employments

           Minors, except those indentured as apprentices in accordance with Chapter 4 of this Title, shall not be employed, permitted, or suffered to work:

           (1) In oiling, cleaning, or wiping machinery or shafting, or in applying belts to pulleys;

           (2) In or about any mine or quarry;

           (3) In or about places where stone cutting or polishing is done;

           (4) In or about any plant manufacturing explosives or articles containing explosive components; or in the use or transportation of the same;

           (5) In or about iron or steel manufacturing plants, ore reduction works, smelters, foundries, forging shops, hot rolling mills, or in any other place in which the heat treatment of metals is done;

           (6) In the operation of machinery used in the cold rolling of heavy metals, or in the operation of power-driven machinery for punching, shearing, stamping, bending, or planing metals;

           (7) In or about saw mills or cooperage stock mills;

           (8) In the operation of power-driven woodworking machines, or off-bearing from circular saws;

           (9) In logging operations;

           (10) As drivers of any motor vehicle on a public road if they are minors sixteen years of age or younger. Minors seventeen years of age or older may be employed, permitted, or suffered to work as drivers of a motor vehicle only under the following restrictions:

           (a) The driving constitutes no more than one-third of the minor's work time in any work day and no more than twenty percent of the minor's work time in any work week.

           (b) Any further restrictions imposed by federal law on the driving of minors during employment under the provisions of the Teen Drive for Employment Act which amends the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 212 through 213.

           (11) In the operation of passenger or freight elevators or hoisting machines;

           (12) In spray painting or in occupations involving exposure to lead or its compounds, or to dangerous or poisonous dyes and chemicals;

           (13) In any place or establishment in which the sale of alcoholic beverages, as defined in R.S. 26:241, constitutes its main business, unless the minor is a musician performing in a band on the premises under written contract with the holder of the alcoholic beverage permit for a specified time period and is under direct supervision of his parent or legal guardian during such time. Any place or establishment holding a duly issued retail dealer's alcoholic beverage permit or license, for which the sale of alcoholic beverages does not constitute the main business of the establishment may employ anyone under the age of eighteen provided the minor's employment does not involve the sale, mixing, dispensing, or serving of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.

           (14) In any other place of employment or in any other occupation that the secretary shall, after a public hearing thereon, determine hazardous or injurious to the life, health, safety or welfare of such minors.

           Amended by Acts 1950, No. 80, §1; Acts 1976, No. 624, §2, eff. Aug. 4, 1976; Acts 1982, No. 498, §1; Acts 1993, No. 621, §1, eff. June 15, 1993; Acts 1993, No. 623, §1; Acts 1999, No. 443, §1; Acts 2001, No. 421, §1, eff. June 15, 2001.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2023 · leading case: Boyer v. Johnson, 360 So. 2d 1164 (La. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Boyer v. Johnson, 360 So. 2d 1164 (La. 1978). · cites it 7× “R.S. 23:161(10), prohibiting the employment of a minor under eighteen years of age as driver of a motor vehicle used for commercial purposes; La.”
Ewert v. Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co., 548 So. 2d 358 (La. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 7× “The majority in effect holds that when an employer employs a minor in an occupation prohibited by § 23:161 of the Child Labor Laws and the minor is injured in the course and scope of that employment, this creates an exception to the exclusivity and coverage provisions of the…”
Mott v. River Par. Maint., Inc., 432 So. 2d 827 (La. 1983). · cites it 3× “R.S. 23:161. Accordingly, if the worker's compensation act is not applicable, plaintiff's petition in tort against RPM and Avondale states a cause of action.”
Manuel v. State, 692 So. 2d 320 (La. 1996). “R.S. 23:161; and qualify as an adult for purposes of mental health statutes and regulations, La.”
Patterson v. Martin Forest Prods., Inc., 774 So. 2d 1148 (La. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “R.S. 23:161. The court then embarked upon a two-pronged inquiry, which it phrased as follows: Whether there is a distinction between a case where a minor is hired in violation of law, as here, or where he is legally hired but required to perform a task in violation of law, is…”
Mott v. River Par. Maint., Inc., 417 So. 2d 384 (La. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 9× “as a laborer and only to that extent should be considered an employee of the company, citing the provisions of LSA-R.S. 23:161, which forbids the employment of minors to drive motor vehicles or spray dangerous dyes and chemicals.”
Daniels v. Dauphine, 557 So. 2d 1062 (La. Ct. App. 1990). “ISSUES ON APPEAL On appeal, plaintiff argues that: (1) There are material issues of fact in dispute, making summary judgment inappropriate; (2)(a) Matlock and Peters were at fault in hiring the young boys to purchase gasoline for the mowing operation, particularly in violating…”
Guillot v. State, Through La State Police, 364 So. 2d 254 (La. Ct. App. 1979). “In Boyer , defendant employed plaintiff's 15-year-old son to drive a commercial motor vehicle in violation of a criminal statute, LSA-R.S. 23:161(10). In holding the defendant employer liable to the parents for the death of the boy while operating the vehicle, the court found…”
Romano v. Lomasney, 423 So. 2d 787 (La. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “On the first issue, the question of whether the defendants violated the Child Labor Law, the statute in question is LSA-R.S. 23:161. It states in pertinent part: No minor under the age of eighteen years (except those indentured as apprentices in accordance with Chapter 4 of this…”
Thornhill v. Black, Sivalls & Bryson, Inc., 391 So. 2d 1256 (La. Ct. App. 1980). “In support of this contention the plaintiff cites LSA-R.S. 23:161(1) as follows: “Minors (except those indentured as apprentices in accordance with Chapter 4 of this Title) shall not be employed, permitted or suffered to work: (1) in oiling, cleaning, or wiping machinery or…”
Messer v. Bagwell Coatings, Inc., 283 So. 2d 279 (La. Ct. App. 1973). “, particularly R.S. 23:161. It is claimed that any employment contract made in violation of the provisions of the Child Labor Law is void, and that, in the absence of a valid contract of employment, there can be no coverage under the Workmen's Compensation Act.”
Estaves v. Faucheux, 111 So. 2d 802 (La. Ct. App. 1959). “These statutes are LSA-R.S. 23:161 and LSA-R.S. 23:215. The first of these statutes provides that no minor under the age of eighteen years shall be employed "* * In any place or establishment in which intoxicating alcoholic liquors are served or sold for consumption on the…”
Show all 22 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(1): 1 case
Thornhill v. Black, Sivalls & Bryson, Inc., 391 So. 2d 1256 (La. Ct. App. 1980). “In support of this contention the plaintiff cites LSA-R.S. 23:161(1) as follows: “Minors (except those indentured as apprentices in accordance with Chapter 4 of this Title) shall not be employed, permitted or suffered to work: (1) in oiling, cleaning, or wiping machinery or…”
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(10): 4 cases
Boyer v. Johnson, 360 So. 2d 1164 (La. 1978). “R.S. 23:161(10), prohibiting the employment of a minor under eighteen years of age as driver of a motor vehicle used for commercial purposes; La.”
Guillot v. State, Through La State Police, 364 So. 2d 254 (La. Ct. App. 1979). “In Boyer , defendant employed plaintiff's 15-year-old son to drive a commercial motor vehicle in violation of a criminal statute, LSA-R.S. 23:161(10). In holding the defendant employer liable to the parents for the death of the boy while operating the vehicle, the court found…”
Mott v. River Par. Maint., Inc., 417 So. 2d 384 (La. Ct. App. 1982). “as a laborer and only to that extent should be considered an employee of the company, citing the provisions of LSA-R.S. 23:161, which forbids the employment of minors to drive motor vehicles or spray dangerous dyes and chemicals.”
Boyer v. Johnson, 350 So. 2d 961 (La. Ct. App. 1977).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(12): 1 case
Mott v. River Par. Maint., Inc., 417 So. 2d 384 (La. Ct. App. 1982). “as a laborer and only to that extent should be considered an employee of the company, citing the provisions of LSA-R.S. 23:161, which forbids the employment of minors to drive motor vehicles or spray dangerous dyes and chemicals.”
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(12)(14): 1 case
Jose Flores Moran Versus Amtrust North Am. & Jacques-Imo Cafe, LLC (La. Ct. App. 2023).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(4): 2 cases
Boyer v. Johnson, 360 So. 2d 1164 (La. 1978). “R.S. 23:161(10), prohibiting the employment of a minor under eighteen years of age as driver of a motor vehicle used for commercial purposes; La.”
Boyer v. Johnson, 350 So. 2d 961 (La. Ct. App. 1977).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(7): 1 case
Patterson v. Martin Forest Prods., Inc., 774 So. 2d 1148 (La. Ct. App. 2000). “R.S. 23:161. The court then embarked upon a two-pronged inquiry, which it phrased as follows: Whether there is a distinction between a case where a minor is hired in violation of law, as here, or where he is legally hired but required to perform a task in violation of law, is…”
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:161(9): 2 cases
Ewert v. Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co., 548 So. 2d 358 (La. Ct. App. 1989). “The majority in effect holds that when an employer employs a minor in an occupation prohibited by § 23:161 of the Child Labor Laws and the minor is injured in the course and scope of that employment, this creates an exception to the exclusivity and coverage provisions of the…”
Dugan ex rel. Dugan v. Gen. Servs. Co., 799 So. 2d 760 (La. Ct. App. 2001).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.