Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Leopold v. Texas & P. Ry. Co., 81 So. 602.

22 citing documents.

Stelly v. Texas & NOR Co. 49 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1950
222 ; Leopold v. Texas & P. R. Co., , 81 So.
Hutchinson v. Texas N. O. R. Co. 33 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1947
Martin v. Yazoo M. R. Co. 181 So. 571 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
Lockhart v. Missouri Pac. R. Co. 153 So. 577 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Link v. Shreveport Rys. Co. 153 So. 77 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Pipes v. Gallman 140 So. 40 La. 1932
Delaune v. Breaux 135 So. 253 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
Williams v. Lenfant 131 So. 857 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931
sustained by plaintiff, who had been riding on a motor-truck driven by another person and which was in collision with a street car, in which case recovery from the street car company was refused, the court said that the cause of the collision was the “joint negligence of Langford, the driver of the truck on which plaintiff was riding, and plaintiff himself.” In Leopold v. Texas & Pacific Ry., , 81 So.
Russo v. Texas & Pac. R. R. 131 So. 70 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
App. 727 ; Leopold v. Texas & Pacific R. R. Co., , 81 So.
Chopin v. Levy 125 So. 142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
Smith v. Louisiana & Arkansas Ry. Co. 120 So. 669 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
Taranto v. Orleans Kenner Traction Co. 8 La. App. 715 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
Leopold vs. T. & P. Railway Company, , 81 So.
Hargus v. N. O. Public Service, Inc. 118 So. 847 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
Ford v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. 8 La. App. 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
Pylant v. C. R. I. & P. Ry. Co. 8 La. App. 350 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1928
Tourmillion v. New Orleans Public Service Inc. 3 La. App. 297 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1926
In the absence of evidence showing with legal certainty that the motorman was operating his car at a dangerous rate of speed, or by the exercise of ordinary care after the discovery of the danger could have avoided the collision.” See also Leopold vs. T. & P. R. R. Co., , 81 South.
Reid v. Missouri Pacific Railroad 3 La. App. 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
Townsend v. Missouri Pacific Railroad 3 La. App. 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
Jeansonne v. Texas & Pac. Ry. Co. 100 So. 410 La. 1924
Fallo v. New Orleans Railway & Light Co. 7 Pelt. 373 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1923
And in Leopold vs. T. & P. R. R. Co., , the court denied a recovery to plaintiff who vft.3 in an automobile driven by his son, and had almost crossed the tr- ok when 'it «ye.- struck;, the Court held, that though ths.
Chargois v. Morgan's Louisiana & T. R. & S. S. Co. 87 So. 499 La. 1921
Daull v. New Orleans Ry. & Light Co. 86 So. 477 La. 1920