Hoyt v. Holsum Cab Co.

217 So. 2d 198, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4516
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedDecember 16, 1968
DocketNo. 7508
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 217 So. 2d 198 (Hoyt v. Holsum Cab Co.) 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
Hoyt v. Holsum Cab Co., 217 So. 2d 198, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4516 (La. Ct. App. 1968).

Opinion

LOTTINGER, Judge.

This is a suit for personal injuries and property damages resulting from an inter-sectional collision. The petitioner in the instant suit is Erwin Hoyt, who was riding as a passenger in a cab belonging to Hol-sum Cab, Inc. The defendants are Holsum Cab, Inc., Alphonse Johnson, the driver of the other vehicle, and Willie Mae Davis, the owner of said vehicle, and her liability insurer, The New York Fire and Marine Insurance Co. The Lower Court awarded judgment in favor of petitioner and against Holsum Cab, Inc., in the sum of $1,483.84. Petitioner’s demand as against Willie Mae Davis and Alphonse Johnson and their insurer, was dismissed. A suspensive appeal was taken by the defendants, Holsum Cab, Inc., as well as its insurer, and petitioner has taken a devolutive appeal.

A companion suit entitled “Willie Mae Davis, et al v. Holsum Cab Company, Inc., et al”, No. 7509 on the docket of this Court, 217 So.2d 198, was consolidated with the instant case for purposes of trial, and the Lower Court gave written reasons for its decision in both cases; however, separate judgments were rendered. In Suit 7509, the petitioners are Willie Mae Davis, Dorothy Mae Heatley, individually and as mother and natural tutrix of her minor child, Alphonse Johnson, Jr., and Charles Joseph Williams. Defendants were Hol-sum Cab, Inc., its insurer, Imperial Casualty and Indemnity Co., and Huey P. Pre-witt. A third party demand was filed by all defendants against Willie Mae Davis, Dorothy Mae Heatley, as natural tutrix of her minor son, Alphonse Johnson, Jr., and New York Fire & Marine Insurance Co. The Court therein gave judgment in favor of petitioner Charles Williams, and against [200]*200defendant, Holsum Cab, Inc., in the sum of $375.00, in favor of Willie Mae Davis and against said defendant in the sum of $150.00, in favor of Dorothy Mae Heatley, individually, and against said defendant in the sum of $70.00, and in favor of Dorothy Mae Heatley as natural tutrix of Alphonse Johnson, Jr., and against said defendant in the sum of $794.00. Holsum Cab, Inc., Imperial Casualty and Indemnity Company as principal and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, as surety, filed a sus-pensive appeal. Devolutive appeals on the question of quantum only were taken by petitioners, Charles Williams and Dorothy Mae Heatley, as natural tutrix of her minor child, Alphonse Johnson, Jr.

Both of said suits will be treated in this one opinion, however, separate judgments will be rendered in each suit.

The suits arose as a result of an inter-sectional collision between a Holsum Cab driven by Huey Prewitt and in which Erwin Hoyt was riding as a fare-paying passenger. Prior to the accident, the cab was traveling west on Weller Avenue in the City of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The other vehicle to the collision was a 1956 Mercury automobile owned by Willie Mae Davis and being driven at the time by her minor son, Alphonse Johnson, Jr. Riding as a guest passenger in the Mercury automobile was Charles Joseph Williams. Prior to the accident, the Mercury automobile was traveling north on Plank Road.

The accident occurred at approximately 7 o’clock P.M. on April 3, 1966, at the intersection of Weller Avenue and Plank Road in the City of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Weller Avenue is a two lane asphalt street running generally in an easterly and westerly direction. Weller Avenue makes a dog-leg as it intersects Plank Road. Plank Road is a four lane main thoroughfare, two lanes for traffic traveling south and two lanes for traffic traveling north, with only a line as a separator. The point of collision was about the center of the right or outside traffic lane for north bound traffic on Plank Road.

Due to the dog-leg on Weller Avenue, two traffic lights controlled the intersection at the time of the accident. The corner is somewhat a blind one for traffic approaching Plank Road on Weller Avenue, inasmuch as a building is situated on the corner some five or six feet from the east parallel line of Plank Road. At the time of the accident it was dark.

The only question presented to the Lower Court, other than that of quantum, was the question of which vehicle ran the red light. Mr. Hoyt stated that he was seated in the right front seat of the cab and he first noticed the light to be green for Weller Avenue traffic when he was approximately 100 feet from the intersection. He did not know whether the light later changed to red or remained green at the time of the accident. Huey Prewitt, the cab driver, testified that the light was red as he approached it, however, it turned green and he had a green light at the time of the collision. One other witness for petitioner was Charles Tate, who said he was stopped on Plank Road heading south and that the light was red for Plank Road traffic at the time of the accident. This witness knew Prewitt and had worked with him off and on as a cab driver. Both Charles Williams and Alphonse Johnson, who were in the Davis vehicle, said that the light was green for Plank Road traffic. Therefore, the question to be resolved is one solely of credibility of the witnesses.

After listening to the evidence below, the Lower Court held that at the time of the accident the traffic light was green for traffic approaching on Plank Road. This decision, according to the reasons of the Lower Court, was based upon the testimony of Hoyt, Williams, and Johnson.

There are certain factors in the record which tend to cast serious doubt as to the veracity of the testimony of two of the witnesses who testified on behalf of petitioner, Hoyt. One was that of Charles [201]*201Tate. With regard to his testimony, the Lower Court stated that it was unworthy of belief.

Mr. Tate testified that he was stopped at a red light headed south on Plank Road at the time of the impact. He was stopped in the left hand lane of traffic heading south, and his wife was with him. Upon hearing the impact he looked up and saw that his friend, Prewitt, was in the cab. In spite of this he did not stop to render assistance because he “ * * * had always heard that people gathering around an accident would hinder emergency vehicles coming in.” Although it was dark at the time, he stated that when the light changed to green he proceeded along his way while Mr. Prewitt was still in his cab following the accident. Mr. Tate, upon seeing his friend Prewitt some two or three months following the accident, stopped and told him, for the first time, that he had been a witness to the collision.

Evidently the only fact which Mr. Tate knew about the accident was that the light was green for Mr. Prewitt. He did not know how Mr. Prewitt was dressed, did not know whether he heard any brakes before the impact, didn’t notice the Johnson car, and didn’t tell anyone about the accident until he told Mr. Prewitt. The testimony of Mr. Tate was of such dubious value that counsel for Holsum Cab Company Inc., and its insurer states in his brief before this Court that “ * * * there is no question but that his testimony is not worthy of belief.”

Mr. Hoyt, in his original verified petition, alleges that one of the acts of negligence on the part of the cab driver, was his failure to obey the traffic signal and to stop. Subsequently, by amended petition, this allegation was reiterated and a similar allegation was added to also show negligence on the part of Alphonse Johnson in his failure to obey the traffic signal. Thus, according to the allegations of Mr. Hoyt’s petition, both drivers ran red lights. There was no evidence, however, to show that the lights were not operating properly.

In Mack Trucks, Inc.

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

Related

Farris v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc.
242 So. 2d 335 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1970)
Scruggs v. McCraney
234 So. 2d 262 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1970)
Clement v. Leonard
232 So. 2d 555 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1970)
Profit v. Crescent Construction Co.
232 So. 2d 814 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1970)
Davis v. Holsum Cab Co.
217 So. 2d 202 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
217 So. 2d 198, 1968 La. App. LEXIS 4516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoyt-v-holsum-cab-co-lactapp-1968.