Franz v. N. O. Coffee Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Franz v. N. O. Coffee Co.

8 La. App. 445, 1928 La. App. LEXIS 134

Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided June 18, 1928·No. No. 10,179·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

WESTERFIELD, J.

Plaintiff sued for $470.36 as damages alleged to be due him as a result of a collision between his automobile and one belonging to defendant.

The examination of the first witness placed upon the stand by plaintiff disclosed the fact that plaintiff had been paid all of his alleged damages except $99.00 by an insurance company, whereupon the judge maintained an exception of no 'cause of action as to the amount paid and dismissed the suit for the remaining $99.00, because of the lack of jurisdiction.

The judgment appealed from is clearly erroneous.

Hanton, et al., vs. New Orleans and Carrollton R. L. and P. Company, 124 La. 562, 50 So. 544; Griffith vs. Keller, 147 La. 540, 85 So. 233; Smith vs. Richland Compress & Warehouse Company, 153 La. 820, 96 So. 668; First National Bank of Miami vs. Jefferson Construction Company, 162 La. 47, 110 So. 84; Hennican vs. Woodman, 1 La. App. 281; Hendren vs. Crescent City S. & M. Water Company, 1 La. App. 625.

The judgment appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings according to law and the views herein expressed.

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

WESTERFIELD, J.

Plaintiff sued for $470.36 as damages alleged to be due him as a result of a collision between his automobile and one belonging to defendant.

The examination of the first witness placed upon the stand by plaintiff disclosed the fact that plaintiff had been paid all of his alleged damages except $99.00 by an insurance company, whereupon the judge maintained an exception of no 'cause of action as to the amount paid and dismissed the suit for the remaining $99.00, because of the lack of jurisdiction.

The judgment appealed from is clearly erroneous.

Hanton, et al., vs. New Orleans and Carrollton R. L. and P. Company, 124 La. 562, 50 So. 544; Griffith vs. Keller, 147 La. 540, 85 So. 233; Smith vs. Richland Compress & Warehouse Company, 153 La. 820, 96 So. 668; First National Bank of Miami vs. Jefferson Construction Company, 162 La. 47, 110 So. 84; Hennican vs. Woodman, 1 La. App. 281; Hendren vs. Crescent City S. & M. Water Company, 1 La. App. 625.

The judgment appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings according to law and the views herein expressed.

Franz v. N. O. Coffee Co., 8 La. App. 445, 1928 La. App. LEXIS 134 (La. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

8 La. App. 445 (Franz v. N. O. Coffee Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related