DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Geoghegan v. Greyhound Corporation, 76 So. 2d 412.

29 citing documents.

  • Bell v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co. 707 So. 2d 102 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
    (1954); , 59 Ed. Law Rep.
  • Clomon v. Monroe City School Bd. 557 So. 2d 1100 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • Fields v. Senior Citizens Center, Inc. 528 So. 2d 573 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • Gabbard v. Areno 302 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
  • Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. v. Gay 276 So. 2d 893 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
  • Holliday v. Rudesill 250 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
    In this regard, plaintiffs rely on Ardoin v. Travelers Insurance Co., La.App., ; , , and Davis v. St.
  • Ardoin v. Travelers Ins. Co. 229 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
    (1954); McCandless v. Southern Bell Telephone & Tel.
  • Miller v. Kinney 213 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
    1048 , (1958); , (1954); Louisiana Power and Light Co. v. Saia, 188 La.
  • Neames v. Fidelity General Insurance Company 206 So. 2d 575 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
    a case somewhat analogous to the one at bar, the Supreme Court held a bus driver negligent in proceeding at night in a rain at a speed of 45 miles per hour and running into cattle on a public highway after passing an oncoming vehicle.
  • Wortham v. Owens 200 So. 2d 781 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    1 , ; Fontenot v. Continental Casualty Co., La.App.
  • Deville v. Aetna Insurance Company 191 So. 2d 324 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
  • Soprano v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 165 So. 2d 308 La. 1964
  • Christ v. State, Department of Highways 161 So. 2d 322 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
    983 , ; , ; Culpepper v. Leonard Truck Lines, 208 La.
  • Eubanks v. Wilson 162 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
    2 Cir., , certiorari denied, or even a cow in a non-stock law area, , , he may be held negligent for failing to avoid the accident by not observing sooner an object in the highway which, in reality, may be virtually as obscure and indistinguishable as the obstructing truck parked on the highway, which (as to an oncoming motorist) was held to constitute a negligent parking
  • Soprano v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 155 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
    Lopreore v. New Orleans Public Service, La.App., .
  • Romans v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. 137 So. 2d 82 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
    Co., La.App., ; Theriot v. Marquette Casualty Company, La.App., ; , .
  • Lewis v. Quebedeaux 134 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
    1084 , ; , ; McCandless v. Southern Bell Tel.
  • Broussard v. American Insurance Co. 127 So. 2d 587 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    ndants have not discharged such burden.” The general rule of law in the case at bar is found in the case of Myers v. American Chain and Cable Company, Inc., et al., La.App., , which rule is stated thusly: “Under the general rule plaintiff would be guilty of contributory negligence as he was not able to stop within the range of his headlights, , ; Louisiana Power and Light Company v. Saia, 188 La.
  • McGee v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. 125 So. 2d 787 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
    238 ; Geoghegan v. Greyhound Corporation, 1954, , ; McCandless v. Southern Bell Tel.
  • West v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance 124 So. 2d 321 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    Under the facts as found by the trial court and as fully substantiated by the record, , , in which our Supreme Court held, as follows: “ ‘A motorist is held to have seen an object, which, by the use of ordinary care and prudence, he should have seen in time to avoid running into it, * *.
  • McCandless v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. 120 So. 2d 501 La. 1960
    585 , ; Ehtor v. Parish, La.App., ; LeBlanc v. Jones, La.App., ; Howard v. Great American Indemnity Company, La.App., ; , .
  • Page v. Northern Insurance Company of New York 117 So. 2d 279 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1959
    Louisiana Power & Light Company v. Saia, 188 La.
  • Stephens v. Natchitoches Parish School Board 110 So. 2d 156 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1959
    1084 , ; , , and Watkins v. Strickland Transportation Co., La.App., .
  • Franklin v. Holomon 110 So. 2d 776 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
    Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. Saia, 188 La.
  • Myers v. American Chain & Cable Co. 109 So. 2d 270 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
    Under the general rule plaintiff would be guilty of contributory negligence as he was not able to stop within the range of his headlights, , ; Louisiana Power and Light Company v. Saia, 188 La.
  • Simoneaux v. State, Department of Highways 106 So. 2d 742 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1958
    App., ; , ; King v. Risdon & W. E. Holoman Lumber Company, Inc., La.App., ; Arceneaux v. Louisiana Highway Commission, La.App., .
  • Guidry v. Crowther 96 So. 2d 71 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    relied upon by defendants, concern instances where a driver was unable because of his speed, excessive under the circumstances, to avoid hitting objects reasonably to be anticipated in his path; the speed therefore being a proximate cause of the accident.
  • Gaines v. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. 86 So. 2d 218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
    ■ ■ We are informed that the District Court held that a proximate cause of the accident was the negligence of Latil in driving at a speed excessive under the conditions in force at the time of the accident of poor visibility, wet asphalt, and so that he was not able to stop within the range of his headlights; , ; Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. Saia, 188 La.
  • Gautreaux v. Orgeron 84 So. 2d 632 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    v. Greyhound Corporation, , ; Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. Saia, 188 La.