Brooks v. Dawkins

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Brooks v. Dawkins

2 La. App. 674, 1925 La. App. LEXIS 231

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 6, 1925

DocketNo. 2079

StatusPublished

This text of 2 La. App. 674 (Brooks v. Dawkins) 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

Brooks v. Dawkins, 2 La. App. 674, 1925 La. App. LEXIS 231 (La. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

CARVER, J.

This case is exactly similar to that of William J. Brown against the same defendants, this day decided, except that Ernest Brooks, the boy arrested in this case, was not only a member of the freight train excursion party but had previously been found in company with some other boys “shooting” dice and had been arrested for breaking open a school house. The evidence does not shoW What became of this charge. We do not think this circumstance sufficient to differentiate the cases.

It is accordingly decreed that the judgment of the lower court, as to S. D. Dawkins, he reversed and that Floyd Brooks do have and recover for the use and benefit of his minor son Ernest Brooks judgment against S. D. Dawkins in the sum of one hundred dollars with 5% per annum interest thereon from this date until paid and all costs of both courts. It is further decreed that as to the defendant Carson, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

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

CARVER, J.

This case is exactly similar to that of William J. Brown against the same defendants, this day decided, except that Ernest Brooks, the boy arrested in this case, was not only a member of the freight train excursion party but had previously been found in company with some other boys “shooting” dice and had been arrested for breaking open a school house. The evidence does not shoW What became of this charge. We do not think this circumstance sufficient to differentiate the cases.

It is accordingly decreed that the judgment of the lower court, as to S. D. Dawkins, he reversed and that Floyd Brooks do have and recover for the use and benefit of his minor son Ernest Brooks judgment against S. D. Dawkins in the sum of one hundred dollars with 5% per annum interest thereon from this date until paid and all costs of both courts. It is further decreed that as to the defendant Carson, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 La. App. 674, 1925 La. App. LEXIS 231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-dawkins-lactapp-1925.