Robert F. Herbster v. United Gas Corporation and Mrs. Jane Foreman

Fifth Circuit

Robert F. Herbster v. United Gas Corporation and Mrs. Jane Foreman

321 F.2d 71, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4406

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedAugust 8, 1963

Docket19881

StatusPublished

This text of 321 F.2d 71 (Robert F. Herbster v. United Gas Corporation and Mrs. Jane Foreman) 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

Robert F. Herbster v. United Gas Corporation and Mrs. Jane Foreman, 321 F.2d 71, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4406 (5th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this diversity action the plaintiff sued, his lessor and the .United Gas Corporation, a utility company engaged in the distribution of natural gas in Lake Charles, Louisiana. He alleged that he was severely burned in a fire in his apartment caused by the defendants’ negligence. The plaintiff was the only witness to the fire. There was no direct evidence of the cause of the fire. When the firemen arrived, the bedding and wallpaper were on fire. United Gas did not own or have any control over the piping from its meter, which was some distance from the apartment, nor did it have any control over the appliances in the apartment. There is no merit to the contention that United Gas, as a matter of law, was negligent. We hold that the trial judge correctly submitted the issue of negligence to the jury; that sufficient evidence supports the verdict. We hold also that the trial judge did not err in declining to charge on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. See Naquin v. Marquette Casualty Co., La.App.1962, 143 So.2d 122; A. & J., Inc. v. Southern Cities Distributing Company, 1932, 173 La. 1051, 139 So. 477.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this diversity action the plaintiff sued, his lessor and the .United Gas Corporation, a utility company engaged in the distribution of natural gas in Lake Charles, Louisiana. He alleged that he was severely burned in a fire in his apartment caused by the defendants’ negligence. The plaintiff was the only witness to the fire. There was no direct evidence of the cause of the fire. When the firemen arrived, the bedding and wallpaper were on fire. United Gas did not own or have any control over the piping from its meter, which was some distance from the apartment, nor did it have any control over the appliances in the apartment. There is no merit to the contention that United Gas, as a matter of law, was negligent. We hold that the trial judge correctly submitted the issue of negligence to the jury; that sufficient evidence supports the verdict. We hold also that the trial judge did not err in declining to charge on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. See Naquin v. Marquette Casualty Co., La.App.1962, 143 So.2d 122; A. & J., Inc. v. Southern Cities Distributing Company, 1932, 173 La. 1051, 139 So. 477.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

321 F.2d 71, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-f-herbster-v-united-gas-corporation-and-mrs-jane-foreman-ca5-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack