Dominguez v. American Casualty Co.

I must concede that, if the holding of this court in Waits v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of North America, 215 La. 349, 40 So.2d 746, was correct, then the majority opinio» in the instant case is likewise correct, as-the two cases cannot be distinguished. At the time the Waits case was decided by this court, I was of the opinion that the majority had reached an erroneous conclusion. I am still of that opinion. This-court, in extending the so-called “initial permission” rule, as first announced in Parks v. Hall, 189 La. 849, 181 So. 191, to apply to the facts in the Waits case and to the facts in the…