Borey v. Di George

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Borey v. Di George

129 So. 162, 14 La. App. 76, 1930 La. App. LEXIS 415

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 16, 1930

DocketNo. 13,350

StatusPublished

This text of 129 So. 162 (Borey v. Di George) 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

Borey v. Di George, 129 So. 162, 14 La. App. 76, 1930 La. App. LEXIS 415 (La. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTERFIELD, J.

This case grows out of a collision between motor vehicles. ■ The trial court resolved the conflicting testimony as to the responsibility for the accident in plaintiff’s favor, and awarded him judgment in the sum of $216.55.

We believe that the conclusions of the court on the question of liability are, correct, but find that one item of damage claimed is not proven to our satisfaction. Twenty-five dollars, which was allowed as [77]*77damage to certain flowers which were contained in plaintiff’s truck at the time of the accident (plaintiff being a florist), must be deducted because not • established by the testimony.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from will be amended by reducing the amount awarded plaintiff from $216.55 to $191.55, and, as thus amended, affirmed. Plaintiff to pay costs of appeal.

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

WESTERFIELD, J.

This case grows out of a collision between motor vehicles. ■ The trial court resolved the conflicting testimony as to the responsibility for the accident in plaintiff’s favor, and awarded him judgment in the sum of $216.55.

We believe that the conclusions of the court on the question of liability are, correct, but find that one item of damage claimed is not proven to our satisfaction. Twenty-five dollars, which was allowed as [77]*77damage to certain flowers which were contained in plaintiff’s truck at the time of the accident (plaintiff being a florist), must be deducted because not • established by the testimony.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from will be amended by reducing the amount awarded plaintiff from $216.55 to $191.55, and, as thus amended, affirmed. Plaintiff to pay costs of appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 So. 162, 14 La. App. 76, 1930 La. App. LEXIS 415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/borey-v-di-george-lactapp-1930.