Jadie S. Adams v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Jadie S. Adams v. United States

260 F.2d 467

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 5, 1958

Docket17260_1

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 260 F.2d 467 (Jadie S. Adams v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jadie S. Adams v. United States, 260 F.2d 467 (5th Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This action arises under the Federal Tort Claims Act. 1 The District Court found the Government employee negligent in following the plaintiff’s automobile too closely, but the plaintiff also negligent in failing to signal her intention to make a right turn and in swerving to the left before making that turn. It further found that the negligent operation of the automobile by the plaintiff proximately contributed to the collision and resultant injuries and damages. After carefully studying the testimony and exhibits, we hold that such findings are not clearly erroneous. Rule 52(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

The Government furnished to the plaintiff’s attorneys such statements of witnesses, photographs, and sketches as they requested, but the Court declined to permit plaintiff’s counsel to inspect the official investigation and report of the accident. In so ruling, the Court did not abuse its discretion. Hickman v. Taylor, 1947, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment is

Affirmed.

1

. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346, § 2671 et seq.

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

PER CURIAM.

This action arises under the Federal Tort Claims Act. 1 The District Court found the Government employee negligent in following the plaintiff’s automobile too closely, but the plaintiff also negligent in failing to signal her intention to make a right turn and in swerving to the left before making that turn. It further found that the negligent operation of the automobile by the plaintiff proximately contributed to the collision and resultant injuries and damages. After carefully studying the testimony and exhibits, we hold that such findings are not clearly erroneous. Rule 52(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

The Government furnished to the plaintiff’s attorneys such statements of witnesses, photographs, and sketches as they requested, but the Court declined to permit plaintiff’s counsel to inspect the official investigation and report of the accident. In so ruling, the Court did not abuse its discretion. Hickman v. Taylor, 1947, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment is

Affirmed.

1

. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346, § 2671 et seq.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 F.2d 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jadie-s-adams-v-united-states-ca5-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack