Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Vienne v. Chalona, 28 So. 2d 154.

16 citing documents.

Malone v. Hartford Insurance 239 So. 2d 697 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1970
Burns v. Evans Cooperage Company, 208 La.
Jeansonne v. Willie 212 So. 2d 226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Gilbert, La.App., ; Bouis v. Employers Liability Assurance Corporation, La.App., ; McNulty v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co., La.App., ; Max Barnett Furniture Co. v. Barrosse, La.App., ; Crow v. Alesi, La.App., ; Gandy v. Arrant, La.App., ; McDaniel v. Capitol Transport Co., La.App., ; Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., ; Roberson v. Rodriguez, La.App., 186 So.
Volkswagen Insurance v. Tamburello 210 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
406 , (1945); ; the drivers of the following vehicles were found to be negligent under the circumstances of each particular case.
Taylor v. Genuine Parts Company 192 So. 2d 241 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1967
In Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., , the lead car driven by Miss Vienne and the car following, operated by Mrs. Streckfus, were stopped at a railroad crossing.
Murray v. Shreveport Transit Co. 188 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
* * * “The driver of a car following a few feet behind another, under circumstances such that he should anticipate the possibility of obstruction or trouble of some sort, should have his car under such control or proceed at such a rate of speed that he can stop at once if the car in front stops.” -156 , La.App., Orleans 1946, defendant’s car was stopped immediately behind plaintiff’s car on a street in the City of New Orleans, awaiting the passage of a railroad train.
Rezza v. Cziffer 186 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1966
App., , and Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., .
Nixon v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company 161 So. 2d 361 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
Elder v. Travelers Indemnity Company 125 So. 2d 694 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
In Vienne et al. v. Chalona et al., La.App.Orleans, 1946, , a case involving a similar factual situation, it was held "* * * for the rule is well settled that `The driver of a car following a few feet behind another, under circumstances such that he should anticipate the possibility of obstruction or trouble of some sort, should have his car under such control or procee
Sibley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. 113 So. 2d 824 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1959
406 , ; Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., ; Roberson v. Rodriguez, La.App., 186 So.
Rosenquist v. New Amsterdam Casualty Company 78 So. 2d 225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
See Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., .
McNulty v. Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Co. 73 So. 2d 23 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
See Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., ; Trascher v. Eagle Indemnity Co. of New York, La.App., ; Washington v. T. Smith & Son, La.App., .
Max Barnett Furniture Co. v. Barrosse 70 So. 2d 886 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
406 , ; Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., ; Roberson v. Rodriguez, La.App., 186 So.
McNeely v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 69 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
App., 1942, ; Carruthers v. Holloway; La.App., 1944, ; Boudra v. Williams, La.App., 1944, ; Hebert v. Keller, La.App., 1944, ; Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., 1946, ; Adams v. Kennard, La.App., 1949, .
Otis v. Board of Com'rs 62 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
Trascher v. Eagle Indemnity Company of New York, La.App., ; Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., .
Chisholm v. Ryder 56 So. 2d 316 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
648 ; McDaniel v. Capitol Transport Company, Inc., La.App., ; Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., .
Trascher v. Eagle Indemnity Co. of New York 48 So. 2d 695 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
For instance, in the case of Vienne v. Chalona, La.App., , decided by this court, we said: "* * * it appears to us that, since Dr. Harrison has had the advantage of treating Miss Madeline for a long period of time and is intimately acquainted, through personal contract, with the nature of her disabilities, whereas, the doctors for the defendants have examined the lady