Culpepper v. Daniel Industries, Inc.
| Decision Date | 11 October 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 16185,16185 |
| Citation | 500 S.W.2d 958 |
| Parties | Clifton C. CULPEPPER, Appellant, v. DANIEL INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellee. (1st Dist.) |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Tom Alexander, Lance C. Winchester, Houston; Butler, Binion, Rice, Cook & Knapp, Houston, of counsel, for appellant.
William R. Powell, Houston; Funderburk & Bates, Kronzer, Abraham & Watkins, Houston, of counsel, for appellee.
This personal injury case was filed in Texas in December, 1967, within two years following a valve explosion accident which occurred in the State of Louisiana. Summary judgment was granted by the trial court upon appellee's motion that the action was barred by appellant's failure to institute suit within the one year period prescribed by the applicable Louisiana statute of limitation. We reverse the judgment and remand the cause for further proceedings.
Article 4678, Vernon's Texas Annotated Civil Statutes, as applicable here, provides that when death or personal injury is caused by wrongful act, neglect or default of another in a foreign state 'for which a right to maintain an action and recover damages' is given by such foreign state, such right of action may be enforced in this State within the time prescribed for the commencement of such actions by the statutes of this State. This article further provides that Texas law will control 'in all matters pertaining to procedure.' In this State the two year statute of limitation is, of course, applicable to personal injury actions. Article 5526, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.
The basic question here is whether this is a matter of substantive right, controlled by the laws of Louisiana, or whether it is a matter of remedy and of procedure, governed by the laws of Texas. Hobbs v. Hajecate, 374 S.W.2d 351 (Tex.Civ.App.--Austin 1964, writ ref.); California Department of Mental Hygiene v. Copus, 309 S.W.2d 227 (Tex.Sup.1958). More specifically, the question is whether at the time this suit was filed, appellant had a substantive right under Louisiana law to maintain this action. Francis v. Herrin Transportation Co., 432 S.W.2d 710 (Tex.Sup.1968).
Article 2315 West's La.Civ.Code, creates a statutory cause of action for damages as the result of injury caused by the fault of another. Article 3536 West's La.Civ.Code provides for a one year limitation for the bringing of such actions in the State of Louisiana. This article has been held to be prescriptive, and therefore is procedural; it bars the remedy but does not extinguish the right. See Page v. Cameron Iron Works, 259 F.2d 420 (5th Cir. 1959); Huson v. Otis Engineering Corporation, 430 F.2d 27 (5th Cir. 1970); Istre v. Diamond M. Drilling Co., 226 So.2d 779 (3rd Cir. La.App.1969).
In Francis v. Herrin Transportation Co., supra, a wrongful death...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Neal v. Butler Aviation Intern., Inc.
...the scheme of the foreign statute. Francis v. Herrin Transportation Co., Tex.Civ.App.1968, 423 S.W.2d 610; Culpepper v. Daniel Industries, Inc., Tex.Civ.App. 1973, 500 S.W.2d 958. That, however, appears to be deference to foreign law and not a Texas rule of If, as was speculated in the earl......
-
Citibank, Nat. Ass'n v. London
...are matters of procedural rather than substantive law, therefore the limiting statute of the forum prevails. Culpepper v. Daniel Industries, Inc., 500 S.W.2d 958 (Civ. App.1973), writ ref. n.r.e.; 12 Tex.Jur.3d Conflict of Laws § 18 p. 26. The statute of limitations that applies here is Art......
-
Ridling v. Armstrong World
...Copus, 158 Tex. 196, 309 S.W.2d 227, 230, cert. denied, 356 U.S. 967, 78 S.Ct. 1006, 2 L.Ed.2d 1074 (1958); Culpepper v. Daniel Industries, Inc., 500 S.W.2d 958 (Tex.Civ. App.1973). Upon review of the extensive briefs filed by the parties relative to this motion, the Court finds that the de......
-
Rosenberg v. Celotex Corp., 84-1623
...suit, to maintain an action under the law of the state where the death or injury occurred. Culpepper v. Daniel Industries, Inc., 500 S.W.2d 958 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston [1st Div.] 1973, ref'd n.r.e.). Thus, it is clear that a claim for wrongful death cannot be maintained in Texas under Articl......