254 So. 2d 491 - Frey v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Both Ball v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, supra, [ 112 So.2d 741 (La.App. 1959)] and Moak v. Link-Belt [Co.], supra, [ 229 So.2d 395 (La.App. 1969)] relied upon by plaintiff involved new construction or reconstruction of the principal's facility and because this involved new construction or reconstruction the court held that the employees of subcontractors so engaged could sue the principal in tort. In neither case was it shown that the principal was normally engaged in the business of construction or reconstruction of its facilities and therefore its liability to injured employees of subcontractors was not limited to workmen's compensation under LSA-R.S. 23:1061. This is not the case here. Plaintiff admittedly was in the process of repairing the laydown machine, which operation we have determined is an integral part of Comet's occupation of operating drilling rigs. * * * Plaintiff's sole remedy against Comet is under the Louisiana Workmen's Compensation Act.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 265 So. 2d 787 - Duplechin v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company

2. “a pertinent factor... is whether the work performed is usually or customarily performed by those engaged in similar businesses as the principal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 258 So. 2d 153 - Foster v. Western Electric Company