Houston v. Schluntz

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Houston v. Schluntz

208 So. 2d 335, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 5450

Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided March 4, 1968·No. No. 7285·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

BAILES, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the companion case of Attaway et ux. v. Schluntz et al., La.App., 208 So.2d 332, the judgment of the trial court rejecting the demands [336]*336of the plaintiff, Ralph D. Houston, individually and as administrator of the estate of his minor son, James F. Houston, against E. K. Schluntz and his public liability insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, is affirmed at his cost.

Affirmed.

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

BAILES, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the companion case of Attaway et ux. v. Schluntz et al., La.App., 208 So.2d 332, the judgment of the trial court rejecting the demands [336]*336of the plaintiff, Ralph D. Houston, individually and as administrator of the estate of his minor son, James F. Houston, against E. K. Schluntz and his public liability insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, is affirmed at his cost.

Affirmed.

Houston v. Schluntz, 208 So. 2d 335, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 5450 (La. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

208 So. 2d 335 (Houston v. Schluntz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related