Robert F. Kennon

The case involved a lawsuit by Roy L. Fulco and his wife against City Ice Service, Inc. and its insurer for damages from a nighttime car collision on a Shreveport street, where an unauthorized driver took the company's unattended truck (left with keys inside on company property) and drove it without lights into the plaintiffs' vehicle. After three jury trials that produced verdicts for the plaintiffs, the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, reversed the trial court's judgment on appeal and dismissed the suit. The court reasoned that the unknown operator was not an employee or authorized user, the truck was not parked on a public street, and the company's act of leaving keys in the vehicle did not amount to negligence or an implied invitation that proximately caused the accident.

torts & liability

In Caldwell v. Caldwell, an emancipated minor sued his father, who operated a concrete products plant, and the father's workers' compensation insurer for benefits after losing his leg in a tractor accident while returning from lunch following a work-related errand. The trial court awarded compensation at $20 per week for 400 weeks, but on rehearing the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, reversed the judgment. The appellate court found that the plaintiff had not proved by a preponderance of the evidence that an employer-employee relationship existed under the compensation policy, determining instead that the wage arrangement was more akin to a fixed allowance than compensation for covered employment. The suit was therefore dismissed at the plaintiff's costs.

labor & employment

The case involved four plaintiffs who performed labor and supplied materials to renovate a building leased by Mrs. Marie Holley from owner Eugene J. Coen; after Holley failed to pay and declared bankruptcy, the plaintiffs sought to enforce laborer's and materialman's liens on the property or, alternatively, obtain personal judgment against Coen. The district court canceled the liens but awarded the plaintiffs personal judgment against Coen. On appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed that personal judgment, holding that Coen was not liable because there was no privity of contract between him and the plaintiffs, the unrecorded lease prohibited alterations without his written consent, and he had not authorized the work. The court relied on longstanding Louisiana precedent that a property owner is not responsible for debts incurred by a lessee in improving leased premises, even with the owner's knowledge, to avoid undermining property rights and enabling potential fraud.

propertyprocedurelabor & employment

Mrs. C. W. Corbitt, a licensed real estate broker, sued Stephen H. Robinson to recover a commission after he sold a lot and apartment house in Bossier City to a buyer she had introduced, despite his withdrawal of the property from her agency five days after the showing. The trial court entered judgment for the defendant, but the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, on rehearing, reversed and awarded the plaintiff a reduced commission of $469.97. The court concluded that the broker's advertisements and initial showing were the procuring cause of the sale, even though the owner later negotiated directly with the buyer on different terms including repairs and a lower price.

business & regulatoryproperty

This case involved a lawsuit by Hazel D. Goodwin against the Louisiana Department of Highways seeking damages for the death of her husband, who drowned when his car drove off the end of a highway into the Red River where a bridge had been destroyed. The court decided in favor of the plaintiff, awarding $5,600 in damages, after determining that the Department was negligent in failing to provide adequate warnings and barricades at the abrupt end of the highway. The reasoning centered on the lack of sufficient signs or barriers, particularly at night, creating a dangerous condition that the driver could not reasonably avoid, and that the husband was not contributorily negligent given the unusual hazard and poor visibility of the existing barricade.

torts & liability

This case involved a bus passenger who suffered injuries in a collision between the bus and a truck, leading to consolidated suits by multiple passengers and the bus owner against the drivers, owners, and their insurers. The plaintiff alleged negligence by both the bus and truck drivers, while each side blamed the other for the accident caused by the truck crossing the centerline. The District Court found the truck driver solely at fault due to faulty brakes or poor driving and awarded damages against the truck defendants, rejecting claims against the bus defendants. On appeal, the Court of Appeal affirmed the finding of liability on the truck side, adjusted the damage amounts in several consolidated cases, and upheld the judgments with modifications to reflect those changes.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a truck owner's claim against his insurer for the total loss of his vehicle in a collision more than 50 miles from its principal garaging location in Minden, Louisiana. The insurer argued that the policy's 50-mile radius endorsement barred coverage and that verbal notice to its agent of the insured's move to Texas did not modify the policy due to a clause requiring written endorsements for changes. The court overruled the insurer's exception of no cause or right of action, holding that under Louisiana law, notice to the agent of a change in garaging address could be effective despite the policy's terms, as it concerned an incidental matter rather than the scope of coverage itself, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

This case involved a rear-end car collision on U.S. Highway 80 in which plaintiff Harold Gandy's Nash automobile was struck from behind by defendant T.E. Arrant's Hudson after a lead truck owned by defendant Harold Livingstone stopped suddenly to yield right-of-way at a narrow bridge, causing a chain reaction among following vehicles. Gandy and his insurer sued Arrant and Livingstone for repair costs, while Arrant countersued and raised contributory negligence. The court sustained an exception of no cause of action as to Livingstone, finding his sudden stop did not constitute actionable negligence because the vehicles immediately behind him stopped successfully. It rejected Arrant's reconventional demand but held Arrant liable to Gandy, concluding that Arrant had failed to maintain a proper lookout, speed, and following distance under the circumstances, and that Gandy had stopped without striking the vehicle ahead. The judgment awarded the claimed damages to the plaintiffs against Arrant only.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case concerned a negligence claim against the State of Louisiana brought by the surviving children of a family who drowned in 1947 when their car drove into deep floodwater covering the western approach to a bridge on U.S. Highway 84. After the legislature authorized the suit, the district court awarded damages to the plaintiffs, and the Court of Appeal affirmed that judgment. The court found the Department of Highways had knowledge of the flooding but failed to discharge its duty to warn the public adequately, because the signs in place used language implying qualified permission to proceed rather than a full closure and were not of a barricade type or properly maintained at the critical location. The evidence did not support claims of contributory negligence by the adult occupants of the vehicle.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a lawsuit by plaintiff Singley against defendant Thomas for personal injuries sustained in a 1945 car collision at a Y-shaped intersection in Louisiana, where the plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle driven by his son. The District Court found the defendant negligent for accelerating into the intersection after nearly stopping, thereby obstructing the path of the oncoming car, and awarded the plaintiff damages of $7892.45, determining that the plaintiff was a guest passenger rather than engaged in a joint venture with his son. On appeal, the Court of Appeal affirmed the finding of defendant's negligence as the cause of the accident and the plaintiff's status as a non-negligent guest but reduced the damage award by $1000 to $6892.45 after reviewing evidence of the plaintiff's permanent neck injury and resulting disability as a farmer. The court based its decision on testimony regarding the vehicles' speeds, positions, and the defendant's failure to yield the right-of-way.

torts & liability

In Beauvais v. D.C. Hall Transport, neighboring homeowners sued a freight terminal operator for creating nuisances through nighttime truck operations, noisy loading equipment, steam cleaning, dust, and trash burning that disturbed their sleep and allegedly reduced their property values. The district court awarded damages to the plaintiffs, but on appeal the Court of Appeal of Louisiana held that claims for property depreciation were barred by one-year prescription under the Civil Code because the terminal's construction and operations had begun more than a year before suit. The court applied nuisance principles from Civil Code articles 667-669, considering the character of the locality, the nature and timing of the noises, and their impact on ordinary sensibilities, and reduced the award to the more distant plaintiffs while affirming the remainder.

propertytorts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a landlord filing suit to dispossess a store manager from premises on the ground that his occupancy lacked authorization under the lease. The court held that the manager was an employee of the original lessee rather than a sublessee or partner, and therefore the lease terms prohibiting subleasing had not been violated. The core reasoning was that the employment contract showed no intent to create a partnership, no joint proprietary interest or shared losses, standard employer tax withholdings, and a compensation structure based on a share of profits for services rendered, all of which established an employer-employee relationship.

propertylabor & employmentbusiness & regulatory

This case involved Sun Oil Company, as purchaser of oil from a 40-acre drilling unit in Richland Parish, Louisiana, depositing royalty proceeds into court under Act No. 123 of 1922 due to conflicting ownership claims among about 40 defendants. The Mount Ollie Baptist Church No. 4 asserted ownership of one acre in the southeast corner under a 1925 deed from John Davidson that conveyed the tract for exclusive church use with a resolutory condition causing reversion if that use ceased, and it sought 1/40th of the royalties; the other defendants, who had stipulated among themselves to divide the remaining 39/40ths, contested the church's claim and argued it held only a servitude. The district court awarded the church its 1/40th share and reserved its rights to full production from the acre, and the court of appeal affirmed after reviewing the deed language and Louisiana jurisprudence on fee simple title versus servitudes. The core reasoning was that the church retained fee title because the property remained in continuous church use as required, with no violation of the resolutory condition shown, and the well's central location on the unit supported the church's proportional royalty entitlement under the conservation order.

property

The case involved a claim for workmen's compensation benefits by plaintiff Deason, who was injured while cutting and hauling pulpwood using his own trucks and employees for defendant J.D. Davis. The district court awarded compensation at $20 per week for up to 400 weeks, plus medical expenses, finding Deason to be an employee rather than an independent contractor. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the verbal agreement's at-will termination clause gave Davis effective control over Deason's operations, distinguishing it from cases involving fixed contracts with specified tracts, quantities, and time limits. The court noted that Davis had included Deason on his payroll for workers' compensation insurance purposes.

labor & employment

This case concerned a dispute over ownership of two trucks that defendant Bernelle had sold to R. H. Aulds in 1947 without completing formal mortgage paperwork. Plaintiff Ouachita Trucking Co. later acquired the trucks from Aulds via a bill of sale in August 1948 and filed suit with a writ of sequestration to recover them after Bernelle refused to surrender possession. The trial court ruled for the plaintiff, and the appellate court affirmed, finding that Aulds had obtained valid title from Bernelle and transferred it to the plaintiff before any final reacquisition by Bernelle. The court rejected Bernelle's claims of retained ownership due to the lack of a bill of sale or a completed repossession agreement, holding that he was merely holding the trucks pending financial arrangements by Aulds.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involved a negligence claim by the plaintiff against the City of Monroe, alleging that the bus driver failed to properly assist her husband after he suffered a stroke on the bus, leading to his death. The court decided to affirm the district court's judgment rejecting the plaintiff's demands for damages. The reasoning was that the driver had no prior indication of the passenger's condition, acted prudently in assisting him off the bus and seeking help, and there was no evidence of negligence contributing to the death, which was primarily caused by cerebral hemorrhage.

torts & liability

This case is a workers' compensation action in which plaintiff Albert L. Guthrie sought benefits for an ankle injury sustained on July 30, 1948, while riding on a loaded log truck after quitting his job as a pole peeler for defendant B. I. McGuffy. The district court denied recovery, finding that Guthrie had disregarded repeated warnings not to board the truck before it reached the highway. The appellate court reversed, holding that Guthrie remained entitled to compensation because his transportation home occurred with the tacit consent of the defendant and foreman despite his early departure, given the remote job site, piece-rate pay structure, and lack of inconvenience to the employer. The court set the weekly compensation rate at $15.63 based on Guthrie's earnings and awarded benefits for the period of disability, subject to a credit for prior payments.

labor & employment

The case involved an employee who suffered a work-related hernia requiring two surgeries, after which he returned to his job but claimed permanent total disability under the workers' compensation act due to ongoing pain, tenderness, and atrophy complications that he said prevented normal duties and future promotions. The district court rejected the claim, concluding the employee could perform his current role as a starch cooker. On appeal, the court reversed and awarded compensation for up to 400 weeks (with credits for prior payments and excess wages), reasoning that pain during current duties and those of the next promotional position meant the employee was totally and permanently disabled from work of a reasonable character.

labor & employment

This case concerns whether a truck driver named Johnson, who performed logging and hauling work for Bass-Boyd Lumber Co. on a specific tract at a set price per thousand feet, qualified as an employee or servant of the company. The majority opinion found that Johnson was not an employee because he controlled his own hours and work details. The dissenting opinion disagrees, arguing that Johnson meets the definition of a servant under Article 163 of the Revised Civil Code by engaging his services for the defendant's benefit. The dissent notes that the per-thousand-feet payment method accounts for the lack of direct control over hours and operations and cites supporting Louisiana cases such as Litton v. Natchitoches Oil Mill and Nesmith v. Reich Bros.

labor & employmenttorts & liability

The case involved a plaintiff attempting to establish a lien on a defendant's lease under Act No. 68 of 1942 for services allegedly performed on leased premises or an adjacent road. The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish any lien. The core reasoning was that the defendant had never become legally liable to the plaintiff for the services, meaning no money was ever due and therefore no lien could arise against the lease. As a result, it was unnecessary to determine whether the specific work performed qualified for lien enforcement under the Act.

property