Bertrand v. Audubon Insurance Co.
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., April 24, 1961 129 So. 2d 42; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., July 1, 1881 1 McGl. 158; La., July 15, 1872 24 La. Ann. 498
Bertrand v. Audubon Insurance Co., 124 So. 2d 415 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960).
The holding in the court’s own words
For the reasons assigned in that case we also hold in the instant suit that defendant Hoffpauir was free from any negligence which may have constituted a proximate cause of the accident, and accordingly neither Hoffpauir nor his insurer is liable for the damages which may have been sustained by plaintiffs.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Cited by
- Hoffpauir v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. 124 So. 2d 409 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1960
- Audubon Insurance Co. v. Bertrand 124 So. 2d 416 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Hoffpauir v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. 124 So. 2d 409
- Audubon Insurance Co. v. Bertrand 124 So. 2d 416
Opinion text
HOOD, Judge. Maxiel Bertrand and his wife, Mrs. Vida Bertrand, instituted this suit against Warren Hoffpauir and his public liability insurer, Audubon Insurance Company, for damages alleged to have been sustained by plaintiffs as the result of a motor vehicle collision which occurred in Jefferson Davis Parish on February 25, 1958. Judgment was rendered by the trial court in favor of defendants, dismissing this suit at plaintiffs’ costs, and plaintiffs have appealed from that judgment. This is a companion case to the suits of Hoffpauir et al. v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company and Bertrand, La.App., 124 So.2d 409 , and Audubon Insurance Company v. Bertrand et al., La.App., 124 So.2d 416 . All of these cases arose out of the same accident and were consolidated for trial. In Warren Hoffpauir, et al. v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, et al., supra, we held that the collision which formed the basis for that suit, as well as this one, occurred solely because *416 of the negligence of the driver of the Bertrand car, and that Warren Hoffpauir was free from contributory negligence. For the reasons assigned in that case we also hold in the instant suit that defendant Hoffpauir was free from any negligence which may have constituted a proximate cause of the accident, and accordingly neither Hoffpauir nor his insurer is liable for the damages which may have been sustained by plaintiffs. The judgment of the trial court, therefore, is affirmed at appellants’ costs. Affirmed.