Crosslin v. Whatley

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Crosslin v. Whatley

340 So. 2d 648, 1976 La. App. LEXIS 3513

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 6, 1976

DocketNo. 13067

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 340 So. 2d 648 (Crosslin v. Whatley) 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

Crosslin v. Whatley, 340 So. 2d 648, 1976 La. App. LEXIS 3513 (La. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

BOLIN, Judge.

Judy Crosslin was stopped and searched when her departure from defendant’s clothing store activated a shoplifting warning device. The trial court held the search was unreasonable and awarded plaintiff $350 damages. Defendant appeals and we affirm.

The facts of this case are identical to those in Smith et ux. v. Whatley d/b/a Fantasia No. 2, 338 So.2d 153 (La.App. 2nd Cir., 1976). Plaintiff in that case was accompanied by plaintiff in this case when they were both stopped and searched by employees of defendant. It was stipulated that the testimony in this case would be the same as in Smith and a copy of that transcript of testimony is filed in this record.

For the reasons assigned in Smith v. Whatley, the judgment is affirmed at appellant’s cost.

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

BOLIN, Judge.

Judy Crosslin was stopped and searched when her departure from defendant’s clothing store activated a shoplifting warning device. The trial court held the search was unreasonable and awarded plaintiff $350 damages. Defendant appeals and we affirm.

The facts of this case are identical to those in Smith et ux. v. Whatley d/b/a Fantasia No. 2, 338 So.2d 153 (La.App. 2nd Cir., 1976). Plaintiff in that case was accompanied by plaintiff in this case when they were both stopped and searched by employees of defendant. It was stipulated that the testimony in this case would be the same as in Smith and a copy of that transcript of testimony is filed in this record.

For the reasons assigned in Smith v. Whatley, the judgment is affirmed at appellant’s cost.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

340 So. 2d 648, 1976 La. App. LEXIS 3513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crosslin-v-whatley-lactapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack