Albert v. Lafleur

293 So. 2d 270, 1974 La. App. LEXIS 4635
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 17, 1974
DocketNo. 4492
StatusPublished

This text of 293 So. 2d 270 (Albert v. Lafleur) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Albert v. Lafleur, 293 So. 2d 270, 1974 La. App. LEXIS 4635 (La. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

WATSON, Judge.

Plaintiffs herein, Robert Albert, Hinda Cooper Albert, Mattye Ervin Albert Charles, and Mattye Lois Albert Hall, individually, and on behalf of her minor child, Connie Marie Hall, filed this suit, alleging that some hog’s head cheese which was purchased from defendant, Hilton Lafleur, and manufactured by defendant, Jimmy Fontenot, d/b/a Frank Fontenot Sausage [271]*271Kitchen, made plaintiffs ill; that their illness resulted from food poisoning; that this food poisoning occurred as a result of negligence on the part of defendants in the manufacturing, storing or handling of the hog’s head cheese; and that plaintiffs are entitled to recover damages from defendants. The food poisoning allegedly occurred on or about October 18, 1967. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of defendants rejecting plaintiffs’ demands. Plaintiffs have appealed from the adverse judgment of the trial court. We affirm.

Counsel for plaintiffs contend in brief that the lower court erred in not applying the following principles of law to this case and cite the various cases in support thereof :

(1) Consumer cannot be required to bear burden of proving defects in consumed goods with absolute certainty. Mushatt v. Page Milk Company, 262 So.2d 520 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1972).

(2) A preparer of food is responsible in damages for breach of an implied warranty on account of unfitness of its product. Lesher v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, 129 So.2d 96 (La.App. 2 Cir. 1961); writ of certiorari denied.

(3) Manufacturer and vendor of food stuff designed for human consumption is virtually insurer that such merchandise is pure, wholesome and free from foreign materials and deleterious substances. Gilbert v. John Gendusa Bakery, Inc., 144 So.2d 760 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1962).

We find that cases cited differ from the instant case.

As the court pointed out in the Mushatt case, supra, the issues presented in a case of this kind are factual ones which must be determined by the trier of fact in each case. “The causal relationship must be [established] by the preponderance of the evidence and not merely a matter of conjecture.” 262 So.2d 522. In the Mushatt case, supra, the appellate court found no error in the trial court’s conclusion that Mrs. Mushatt’s illness was caused by the substance consumed. We are, of course, presented with a different situation here where the trial court found that plaintiffs did not establish their case.

In the Lesher case, supra, the appellate court held that there was no manifest error in the trial court’s judgment sustaining an exception of no cause and no right of action on the part of the defendant store.

In the Gilbert case, supra, the food in question “ . . . was conclusively shown to contain some sort of bugs or other foreign matter,” 144 So.2d 762. That is not the case here.

As the trial court apparently found, the evidence establishes that plaintiffs were ill on the day in question, but the evidence is not sufficient to prove that their illness resulted from their consumption of the hog’s head cheese in question or that the hog’s head cheese contained food poisoning organisms. The laboratory report of the Louisiana State Board of Health states that the cheese in question was “Negative salmonella, shigella, Clostridia.” (TR. 31). The letter attached to the laboratory report states: “ . . . no food poisoning organisms were found therein.” (TR. 32).

We will review briefly the testimony presented in the trial court:

Mr. Bobby Savoy, an employee of the Louisiana State Department of Health in Opelousas, stated that on October 20, 1967, his supervisor instructed him to pick up some hog’s head cheese at Lafleur’s grocery in Opelousas. He stated that the hog’s head cheese was kept refrigerated until it was received at the laboratory in New Orleans on October 25, 1967.

John Buswell, an assistant professor of microbiology at USL in Layfayette, qualified as an expert in the field of medical bacteriology, testified that there are four main classes of food poisoning bacteria: shigella, salmonella, clostridia and staphylococci. He stated that with staphylococci the symptoms are very sudden in onset and [272]*272there is generally a high degree of vomiting. He stated that a cooked meat product would become contaminated with staphylococci bacteria within four to eight hours after being left warm or unrefrigerated. This expert disagreed with the report of the State Board of Health in its statement that no food poisoning organisms were present. The report says that there were “Over 3,000,000 coagulase negative staphylococci per gram.” (TR. 31) in the hog’s head cheese. Dr. Buswell testified that coagulase negative staphylococci can produce enterotoxins which cause symptoms of disease; that it is possible that the coag-ulase negative staphylococci mentioned could cause food poisoning and also just as possible that it could not. According to Dr. Buswell, it would depend upon the strain of staphylococci involved and there is nothing in the report of the Board of Health to show whether a kitten test, the only test as to the strain of staphylococci present, was or was not done. Dr. Buswell also testified that coagulase negative staphylococci food poisoning cases are in the minority and that the majority of staphylococci food poisoning cases involve coagu-lase positive strains. Dr. Buswell testified that the symptoms of this type of food poisoning, while severe, are temporary and short lived, lasting only about twenty-four hours, compared to other types. He stated that an infection could occur with 3,000,000 coagulase negative staphylococci per gram and it might also require more, depending upon the particular strain and how much enterotoxin it produced. Dr. Buswell testified that these bacteria would start growing in 30 minutes to an hour after being kept at any temperature over 40 degrees. Dr. Buswell further testified that, in view of the method of preparing hog’s head cheese, any infectious contamination would have had to be extraneous or occur after the preparation.

Edmond Charles testified that he went on a fishing trip with the plaintiffs; that they bought some hog’s head cheese from Mr. Hilton Lafleur; then stopped to dig bait; then stopped at the Fill Up and Bill Up in Port Barre; then stopped and bought some hooks. Mr. Charles testified that he did not eat any of the hog’s head cheese and he did not get sick. He testified that everyone else in the party got sick and that he took them first back to Opelousas and then to the Lafayette Charity Hospital. He testified that they started off on the fishing trip a little after twelve and returned to Opelousas a little after five.

Hinda Cooper Albert, wife of Robert Albert, testified that she was on the fishing trip with her two daughters, both named Mattye; that they bought the hog’s head cheese in the afternoon; that Edmond Charles got the bait; and that she served the hog’s head cheese to those in the party. She testified that she started getting sick when they got to the fishing pond, and that she remained sick for a couple of days. She testified that she and the child were the sickest ones and were kept at the hospital in Lafayette overnight. She testified that she had eaten nothing since she got up around five o’clock until she ate the hog’s head cheese. She testified that they went to the grocery store about 12:30 or 1:00 o’clock and that they ate the sandwiches of hog’s head cheese while they were driving. She stated that the child and one daughter started feeling sick on the way to Krotz Springs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mushatt v. Page Milk Company
262 So. 2d 520 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1972)
Lesher v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company
129 So. 2d 96 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1961)
Gilbert v. John Gendusa Bakery, Inc.
144 So. 2d 760 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
293 So. 2d 270, 1974 La. App. LEXIS 4635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albert-v-lafleur-lactapp-1974.