Granen v. Craven & Lang

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Granen v. Craven & Lang

124 So. 702, 11 La. App. 671, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 308

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 18, 1929

DocketNo. 11,383

StatusPublished

This text of 124 So. 702 (Granen v. Craven & Lang) 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

Granen v. Craven & Lang, 124 So. 702, 11 La. App. 671, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 308 (La. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

JANVIER, J.

Plaintiff seeks to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by falling as a result of stepping into a hole which she alleges was left by defendants while paving a part of Canal Street with concrete.

She testifies that she stepped into the hole alongside of or near the neutral ground and that it was so deep that she went in nearly up to her knee. Her principal witness, who picked her up immediately after the fall, had no recollection whatever of having seen any hole and the evidence of two witnesses who examined the street the next morning proves conclusively that there was no hole such as plaintiff describes. The first layer of concrete had been laid some days before and in this layer of concrete there were small holes about one-half to three-fourths of an inch deep,- placed there for the purpose of allowing the top dressing to hold firmly to the first layer, but these holes were so small as to be inconsequential.

The trial court found in favor of defendant and in its reasons for judgment stated:

“It is evident that this lady fell from some other cause than the hole in the paving, because there was none there * * *”

In this we think he was entirely correct.

For these reasons it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment appealed from be and it is affirmed, at the cost of appellant.

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

JANVIER, J.

Plaintiff seeks to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by falling as a result of stepping into a hole which she alleges was left by defendants while paving a part of Canal Street with concrete.

She testifies that she stepped into the hole alongside of or near the neutral ground and that it was so deep that she went in nearly up to her knee. Her principal witness, who picked her up immediately after the fall, had no recollection whatever of having seen any hole and the evidence of two witnesses who examined the street the next morning proves conclusively that there was no hole such as plaintiff describes. The first layer of concrete had been laid some days before and in this layer of concrete there were small holes about one-half to three-fourths of an inch deep,- placed there for the purpose of allowing the top dressing to hold firmly to the first layer, but these holes were so small as to be inconsequential.

The trial court found in favor of defendant and in its reasons for judgment stated:

“It is evident that this lady fell from some other cause than the hole in the paving, because there was none there * * *”

In this we think he was entirely correct.

For these reasons it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment appealed from be and it is affirmed, at the cost of appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 So. 702, 11 La. App. 671, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/granen-v-craven-lang-lactapp-1929.