Legal Opinion

Rodriguez v. Integrity Contracting

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided May 5, 2010No. 09-1537PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMY, Judge.

I,The claimant sought compensation benefits from his direct employer, its insurer, and an alleged statutory employer. The statutory employer demanded indemnification from the defendant insurer, based on contractual and statutory claims. The workers’ compensation judge ultimately found the statutory employer, the direct employer, and the insurer were liable, in solido, for benefits, penalties, and attorney fees. It ordered indemnification by the insurer only on statutory grounds as it concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the contractual indemnity claim.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. Broussard Physical Therapy v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2008
  3. Artiga v. MA Patout and SonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1996
  4. Ceasar v. New England Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1993
  5. Perkins v. BattisteLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1985

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Garcia v. StateLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2010
  2. Garcia v. StateLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2010
  3. Vaughan Roofing & Sheet Metal, LLC v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  4. Cox, Cox, Filo, Camel & Wilson, LLP v. Louisiana Worker's Comp. Corp.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2021
  5. Stanton v. LOUISIANA WORKERS'COMPENSATION CORPORATIONLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2010

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

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

Powered by the Exa API