John Meyer, Inc. v. Seminary

Louisiana Court of Appeal

John Meyer, Inc. v. Seminary

133 So. 391, 16 La. App. 114, 1931 La. App. LEXIS 434

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 23, 1931

DocketNo. 13,583

StatusPublished

This text of 133 So. 391 (John Meyer, Inc. v. Seminary) 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

John Meyer, Inc. v. Seminary, 133 So. 391, 16 La. App. 114, 1931 La. App. LEXIS 434 (La. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTERFIELD, J.

This ease results from a collision of two motor trucks on the public highway in Plaquemines parish near Jesuits Bend. Plaintiff claims $225.77 as damages to his truck. Prom a judgment awarding plaintiff $200, defendant has appealed.

Counsel for appellant insists that, though nothing but a question of fact is involved in this case, it should not be controlled by the rule which emphasizes the importance of findings of the trial court in such cases.

We have given the record most careful consideration and believe that in resolving the conflicting testimony the trial court has reached the correct conclusion. In any event there are no exceptional features which would remove this case from the influence of the rule concerning the findings of fact by trial courts.

Por the.reasons herein assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

WESTERFIELD, J.

This ease results from a collision of two motor trucks on the public highway in Plaquemines parish near Jesuits Bend. Plaintiff claims $225.77 as damages to his truck. Prom a judgment awarding plaintiff $200, defendant has appealed.

Counsel for appellant insists that, though nothing but a question of fact is involved in this case, it should not be controlled by the rule which emphasizes the importance of findings of the trial court in such cases.

We have given the record most careful consideration and believe that in resolving the conflicting testimony the trial court has reached the correct conclusion. In any event there are no exceptional features which would remove this case from the influence of the rule concerning the findings of fact by trial courts.

Por the.reasons herein assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 So. 391, 16 La. App. 114, 1931 La. App. LEXIS 434, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-meyer-inc-v-seminary-lactapp-1931.