Humble v. Tarver

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Humble v. Tarver

148 So. 452, 1933 La. App. LEXIS 1830

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 5, 1933

DocketNo. 4417.

StatusPublished

This text of 148 So. 452 (Humble v. Tarver) 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

Humble v. Tarver, 148 So. 452, 1933 La. App. LEXIS 1830 (La. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

MILLS, Judge.

This suit arises out of the same accident which was the basis of the demand in the case of Mrs. Lucy Buie Price v. F. H. Tarver et al. (La. App.) 148 So. 450, this day decided, the present case being consolidated with the Price Case for the purpose of trial and argument. All the issues in the case have been concluded by the judgment in the Price Case, except the quantum of damages.

Mrs. Humble was confined to her bed for two days and to her home for two weeks, undergoing treatment all the time for her nerves. She was badly bruised all over and suffered a hemorrhage from the nose and ear. Her right eye was completely closed from bruises and her lower lip was bruised and lacerated. Her upper chest was bruised and injured and, besides a slight concussion of the brain, she suffered a most severe nervous shock. Her extreme nervousness continued for some time after the accident. For these injuries, and for incidental damages and expenses, the lower court allowed the sum of $500.65.

We do not think this allowance unreasonable and therefore affirm the judgment of the lower court; defendant to pay all costs of both courts.

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

MILLS, Judge.

This suit arises out of the same accident which was the basis of the demand in the case of Mrs. Lucy Buie Price v. F. H. Tarver et al. (La. App.) 148 So. 450, this day decided, the present case being consolidated with the Price Case for the purpose of trial and argument. All the issues in the case have been concluded by the judgment in the Price Case, except the quantum of damages.

Mrs. Humble was confined to her bed for two days and to her home for two weeks, undergoing treatment all the time for her nerves. She was badly bruised all over and suffered a hemorrhage from the nose and ear. Her right eye was completely closed from bruises and her lower lip was bruised and lacerated. Her upper chest was bruised and injured and, besides a slight concussion of the brain, she suffered a most severe nervous shock. Her extreme nervousness continued for some time after the accident. For these injuries, and for incidental damages and expenses, the lower court allowed the sum of $500.65.

We do not think this allowance unreasonable and therefore affirm the judgment of the lower court; defendant to pay all costs of both courts.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 So. 452, 1933 La. App. LEXIS 1830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/humble-v-tarver-lactapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack