Kaiser v. Travelers Insurance Company

Fifth Circuit

Kaiser v. Travelers Insurance Company

487 F.2d 1300, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10611

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 11, 1974

Docket73-2653

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 487 F.2d 1300 (Kaiser v. Travelers Insurance Company) 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

Kaiser v. Travelers Insurance Company, 487 F.2d 1300, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10611 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

487 F.2d 1300

Mrs. Laura KAISER, wife of/and Ignatius J. Barreca,
Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross Appellees,
v.
TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Defendants-Appellees,
Henry Brien, Jr., et al.,
Defendants-Appellees-Cross Appellants.

No. 73-2653 Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 11, 1974.

Herman M. Schroeder, New Orleans, La., for plaintiffs-appellants-cross appellees.

Fred E. Salley, Edward J. Koehl, Jr., New Orleans, La., for Brien, Jr. and Travelers Ins. Co.

Cornelius G. Van Dalen, New Orleans, La., for G. Tranchina.

W. K. Christovich, New Orleans, La., for Coastal Sand & Gravel and others.

Robert J. Young, Jr., New Orleans, La., for Great American Ins.

Before THORNBERRY, GOLDBERG and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The parents of a minor child who was killed as a result of a boating accident appeal this admiralty action on two grounds relating to their claim for damages.

First, they claim recovery for loss of love and affection. This point was settled contrary to plaintiffs' contention by our recent cases of Canal Barge Company, Inc. v. Griffith, 480 F.2d 11 (5th Cir. 1973) and Hueschen v. Fluor Ocean Services, 487 F.2d 1401 (5th Cir. 1973) which held that there can be no recovery for loss of love and affection in a death action brought under the general maritime law.

Second, they claim that recovery should have been given for pain, suffering, and mental anguish prior to death. No such contention was made in the trial court and it appears from the record that there is insufficient evidence to support this ground of appeal.

This decision which renders plaintiffs liable for costs of this appeal makes it unnecessary for this Court to consider the merits of the cross-appeal.

Affirmed.

*

Rule 18, 5th Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5th Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I

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

487 F.2d 1300

Mrs. Laura KAISER, wife of/and Ignatius J. Barreca,
Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross Appellees,
v.
TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Defendants-Appellees,
Henry Brien, Jr., et al.,
Defendants-Appellees-Cross Appellants.

No. 73-2653 Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 11, 1974.

Herman M. Schroeder, New Orleans, La., for plaintiffs-appellants-cross appellees.

Fred E. Salley, Edward J. Koehl, Jr., New Orleans, La., for Brien, Jr. and Travelers Ins. Co.

Cornelius G. Van Dalen, New Orleans, La., for G. Tranchina.

W. K. Christovich, New Orleans, La., for Coastal Sand & Gravel and others.

Robert J. Young, Jr., New Orleans, La., for Great American Ins.

Before THORNBERRY, GOLDBERG and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The parents of a minor child who was killed as a result of a boating accident appeal this admiralty action on two grounds relating to their claim for damages.

First, they claim recovery for loss of love and affection. This point was settled contrary to plaintiffs' contention by our recent cases of Canal Barge Company, Inc. v. Griffith, 480 F.2d 11 (5th Cir. 1973) and Hueschen v. Fluor Ocean Services, 487 F.2d 1401 (5th Cir. 1973) which held that there can be no recovery for loss of love and affection in a death action brought under the general maritime law.

Second, they claim that recovery should have been given for pain, suffering, and mental anguish prior to death. No such contention was made in the trial court and it appears from the record that there is insufficient evidence to support this ground of appeal.

This decision which renders plaintiffs liable for costs of this appeal makes it unnecessary for this Court to consider the merits of the cross-appeal.

Affirmed.

*

Rule 18, 5th Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5th Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

487 F.2d 1300, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kaiser-v-travelers-insurance-company-ca5-1974.

Opinion

W. K. Christovich, New Orleans, La., for Coastal Sand & Gravel and others.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack