43578 Precedential Affirmed Processed

King v. Mason

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed January 6, 1958 · 99 So. 2d 117

Cited by

Oceanonics, Inc. v. Petroleum Distributing Company 280 So. 2d 874 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
Sylvest v. Employers Liability Assurance Corp. 252 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
JM Brown Const. Co. v. D & M Mechanical Contr., Inc. 222 So. 2d 93 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
LaBove v. American Employers Insurance Company 189 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1966
Tillery v. Pelican Ice & Cold Storage, Inc. 184 So. 2d 65 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Taylor Con. & Sup. Co. v. American Mut. Liabil. Ins. Co. 163 So. 2d 450 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1964
Miller v. Riley 152 So. 2d 852 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Hospital Service District No. 1 of the Parish of Plaquemines v. Delta Gas, Inc. 141 So. 2d 925 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
Kendrick v. Mason 99 So. 2d 108 La. 1958

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Kendrick v. Mason 234 La. 271

Opinion text

SIMON, Justice. On application of the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company we granted writs in this case addressed to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, and ordered same consolidated for hearing with Kendrick v. Mason, 234 La. 271 , 99 So.2d 108 . Harvey A. King instituted this suit for damages for personal injuries sustained by him as the result of the negligent acts and tort committed by C. N. Mason and his employees in their performance of the contract with the Town of Jena as more fully detailed in the said Kendrick suit. Judgment was rendered in favor of King and against C. N. Mason and his insurer, in solido, by the district court, which, on appeal to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, was amended so as to increase the award for personal damages in favor of the said plaintiff, and as amended the judgment of the district court was affirmed. The issues herein presented are identical with those considered by us in Kendrick v. Mason, 234 La. 271 , 99 So.2d 108 , both cases having grown out of the same tort and consolidated here for purposes of hearing before us. *301 Relative to the-issue of the quantum of damages for personal injuries awarded by the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, in favor of plaintiff, we observe that no error is assigned thereto by the defendants herein. However, we have examined the evidence relative to the personal injuries sustained by plaintiff and find no manifest error in the adequacy of the award made therefor. Accordingly, for the reasons assigned in Kendrick v. Mason, supra, the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, is affirmed.