Kahle v. Michel

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Kahle v. Michel

121 So. 684, 10 La. App. 352, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 524

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedApril 1, 1929

DocketNo. 11,771

StatusPublished

This text of 121 So. 684 (Kahle v. Michel) 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

Kahle v. Michel, 121 So. 684, 10 La. App. 352, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 524 (La. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTE'RFIELD, J.

This is a suit by a doctor for his bill. Defendant claims that the doctor’s bookkeeping is at fault and that many debit items are erroneous. The court, a qua, allowed a credit of $67.00, giving the doctor a judgment for $163.00.

The services extended over a period of more than a year and consist of many office consultations and some house visits. It seems to us that the judgment made sufficient allowance for erroneous charges, which, in some instances, were proven to have been made.

In any event, this case is • one to which the familiar doctrine, that findings of fact by a trial court will not be disturbed on appeal unless manifestly erroneous, is particularly applicable.

For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

WESTE'RFIELD, J.

This is a suit by a doctor for his bill. Defendant claims that the doctor’s bookkeeping is at fault and that many debit items are erroneous. The court, a qua, allowed a credit of $67.00, giving the doctor a judgment for $163.00.

The services extended over a period of more than a year and consist of many office consultations and some house visits. It seems to us that the judgment made sufficient allowance for erroneous charges, which, in some instances, were proven to have been made.

In any event, this case is • one to which the familiar doctrine, that findings of fact by a trial court will not be disturbed on appeal unless manifestly erroneous, is particularly applicable.

For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 So. 684, 10 La. App. 352, 1929 La. App. LEXIS 524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kahle-v-michel-lactapp-1929.