Legal Opinion

Moody v. Arabie

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided March 19, 1986No. 84-1045PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STOKER, Judge.

In this case we are called upon to decide this question: In a suit for damages for personal injuries sustained by an injured worker in which the worker and his attorney have a contract for payment of attorney’s fees on a contingent fee basis, and in which there is an intervention by a worker’s compensation carrier seeking reimbursement of worker’s compensation benefits paid to the injured plaintiff worker, may the worker’s attorney claim a contingent fee on the entire recovery, including the portion which by law is to be paid to the compensation carrier by preference and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Gentry v. PughLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1978
  2. Lyons v. City of ShreveportLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1977
  3. Bell v. Carolina Casualty Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1970
  4. Broussard, Broussard & M., Ltd. v. STATE A. &. CU CO.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1974
  5. Moody v. ArabieLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1983

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Moody v. ArabieSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1986
  2. Mitchell v. Clark Equipment Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1990
  3. Moody v. ArabieSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API