Legal Opinion
Glasgow v. PAR Minerals Corp.
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided July 28, 2010No. 10-64PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SAUNDERS, Judge.
11 Herein, we address whether a suit instituted by the Appellant, Mitchell Glas-cow, against his statutory employer, PAR Minerals, Inc. (PAR), interrupted prescription as to the Appellee, Pipe Services Unlimited, Inc. (Pipe Services). We find that it did not, and we affirm the ruling of the trial court.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
The case before us arises out of an oilfield explosion and fire at a wellsite near Kinder, Louisiana in September of 2007. The Appellant, a direct employee of Ther-ral Story Well Service (TSWS), sustained severe burns in the fire.
PAR entered into a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lima v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1992
- Williams v. Sewerage & Water Bd. of NOSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
- Emmons v. Agricultural Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1963
- Kirkeby-Natus Corporation v. CampbellSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1967
- Williams v. Holiday Inn WorldwideLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Glasgow v. PAR MINERALS CORP.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2011
- Glasgow v. PAR MINERALS CORP.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2011