Vascocu v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Vascocu v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.

61 So. 2d 530, 1952 La. App. LEXIS 812

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedOctober 31, 1952

DocketNo. 7845

StatusPublished

This text of 61 So. 2d 530 (Vascocu v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.) 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

Vascocu v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co., 61 So. 2d 530, 1952 La. App. LEXIS 812 (La. Ct. App. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

HARDY, Judge.

This is a suit for damages brought by the plaintiff as the surviving widow of John Vascocu, who was killed in the railway crossing accident. This case was consolidated for trial and for the purposes of appeal with the cases of Rachal v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App., 61 So.2d 525 and Desadier v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App., 61 So.2d 530.

This case is distinguished from the noted companion cases by reason of the fact that counsel for plaintiff, with becoming candor and frankness, has admitted in this court that in any event this plaintiff -would be precluded from recovery by reason of the fact that decedent, who was the driver of the truck involved in the collision, was unquestionably demonstrated on trial of the case to have been guilty of contributory negligence.

For this reason and for the reasons assigned in our opinion in the Rachal case, the judgment appealed from is affirmed at appellant’s cost.

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

HARDY, Judge.

This is a suit for damages brought by the plaintiff as the surviving widow of John Vascocu, who was killed in the railway crossing accident. This case was consolidated for trial and for the purposes of appeal with the cases of Rachal v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App., 61 So.2d 525 and Desadier v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App., 61 So.2d 530.

This case is distinguished from the noted companion cases by reason of the fact that counsel for plaintiff, with becoming candor and frankness, has admitted in this court that in any event this plaintiff -would be precluded from recovery by reason of the fact that decedent, who was the driver of the truck involved in the collision, was unquestionably demonstrated on trial of the case to have been guilty of contributory negligence.

For this reason and for the reasons assigned in our opinion in the Rachal case, the judgment appealed from is affirmed at appellant’s cost.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 So. 2d 530, 1952 La. App. LEXIS 812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vascocu-v-texas-pacific-railway-co-lactapp-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack