Legal Opinion
Rome v. Mexican Petroleum Corp.
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided January 18, 1926No. 9126PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
BELL, J.
By record admissions made in this case, all issues have been eliminated except that of dependency, within the meaning and intendment of the Employer’s Liability Act of Louisiana (No. 20 of 1914) and subsequent amendments, up to and including those of Section 8, subsection 2 (g) of Act 43 of 1922.
Appellants, as the father and mother, respectively, of their minor son Albert Rome, killed while in the employ of the defendant Company, seek compensation under the Act as dependents of the deceased.
The petitioners allege that their son was employed by defendants as a pipe fitter; that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gregory v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Hamilton v. Texas Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Cauthorn v. Cypress Tank Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1924
- Nelson v. W. K. Henderson Iron Works & Supply Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1924
3Cited by6 opinions
- Galt v. Travelers' Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1932
- Little v. Crow-Edwards Lumber Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1928
- Lewis v. Southern Advance Bag & Paper Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1933
- Grant v. LA. Sawmill Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
- Armes v. Williams Bros.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.