Borrello v. Rohrer

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Borrello v. Rohrer

4 La. App. 510, 1926 La. App. LEXIS 185

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMay 24, 1926

DocketNo. 10,434

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 4 La. App. 510 (Borrello v. Rohrer) 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

Borrello v. Rohrer, 4 La. App. 510, 1926 La. App. LEXIS 185 (La. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTERFIELD, J.

Plaintiff, the owner of a Nash automobile, brings this suit against defendant, the owner of a Ford Sedan, for damages alleged to have been inflicted upon the Nash by the Ford as a result of a collision on May 17, 1925, at [511]*511the intersection of Alexander and Palmyra streets in this city.

Plaintiff claims $150.70 and was awarded a judgment in the sum of $100.00. Defendant alone has appealed.

The Nash car was coming down Alexander street in the direction of Canal street and the Ford out Palmyra in the direction of the lake. In argument and in brief there was much discussion of the right-of-way but we do not find that the city ordinance was introduced in evidence, consequently, we cannot consider which car had the right of way. We have reached the conclusion that the Ford was to blame for the accident. To begin with, the Nash was hit on its right side near the front door by the Ford radiator and front fender. The evidence on both sides indicates that the Nash was well into the intersection before the Ford entered it. The Nash was knocked against the curbing with such force as to break its left rear wheel, suggesting excessive speed on the part of the Ford, which is much the lighter car. It is true the Ford was uninjured, but it is shown to have been equipped with a bumper which protects its forward end which struck the Nash.

For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

WESTERFIELD, J.

Plaintiff, the owner of a Nash automobile, brings this suit against defendant, the owner of a Ford Sedan, for damages alleged to have been inflicted upon the Nash by the Ford as a result of a collision on May 17, 1925, at [511]*511the intersection of Alexander and Palmyra streets in this city.

Plaintiff claims $150.70 and was awarded a judgment in the sum of $100.00. Defendant alone has appealed.

The Nash car was coming down Alexander street in the direction of Canal street and the Ford out Palmyra in the direction of the lake. In argument and in brief there was much discussion of the right-of-way but we do not find that the city ordinance was introduced in evidence, consequently, we cannot consider which car had the right of way. We have reached the conclusion that the Ford was to blame for the accident. To begin with, the Nash was hit on its right side near the front door by the Ford radiator and front fender. The evidence on both sides indicates that the Nash was well into the intersection before the Ford entered it. The Nash was knocked against the curbing with such force as to break its left rear wheel, suggesting excessive speed on the part of the Ford, which is much the lighter car. It is true the Ford was uninjured, but it is shown to have been equipped with a bumper which protects its forward end which struck the Nash.

For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 La. App. 510, 1926 La. App. LEXIS 185, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/borrello-v-rohrer-lactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack