Head v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.

Decision Date11 January 1982
Docket NumberNo. 8563,8563
Citation408 So.2d 1174
PartiesFrances M. HEAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

Young & Burson, Mark Terrance Hoychick and Harry Kent Aguillard, Eunice, for plaintiff-appellant.

Gachassin & Capretz, Carey Tom Jones and Nicholas Gachassin, Lafayette, for defendants-appellees.

Before CULPEPPER, FORET, CUTRER, SWIFT and LABORDE, JJ.

FORET, Judge.

Frances Head (Plaintiff) brought this tort action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by her in a fall on the premises of a hospital while exiting therefrom. Hospital Service District # 1 of St. Landry Parish, Louisiana d/b/a Moosa Memorial Hospital (the Hospital), and its general liability insurer, St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company (St. Paul), were named defendants.

The trial of plaintiff's action resulted in a judgment by the trial court in favor of defendants and against plaintiff dismissing her action. Plaintiff brings this devolutive appeal from that judgment and raises the following issues:

(1) Whether the trial court committed manifest error in finding that plaintiff had failed to prove that her injuries were caused by any negligent conduct of the defendant-Hospital;

(2) Whether the trial court committed manifest error in finding that plaintiff failed to prove the existence of any defect in the entranceway to the Hospital, where she fell;

(3) If so, did the trial court commit manifest error in finding that plaintiff had failed to prove that her injuries were caused by any such alleged defect;

(4) Whether the trial court erred in allowing an expert in the fields of architecture and civil engineering to render an opinion as to the safeness of the entranceway to the Hospital;

(5) Whether evidence of safety standards existing at the time of construction of a building or thing is admissible in a case based on strict liability under LSA-C.C. Articles 2317 and 2322 and,

(6) What is the amount of damages that plaintiff should recover from defendants if this Court finds that they are liable to her?

Because of our decision herein finding defendants liable to plaintiff on the basis of negligence, we pretermit any discussion of issues 2-5. We will make a determination as to quantum.

FACTS

Plaintiff was 71 years old at the time that the accident occurred on December 11, 1978. She was a resident of West Monroe and had come to Basile to care for her daughter, Montez Estes, (who had undergone surgery) and the daughter's family. Plaintiff's daughter was hospitalized in the Moosa Memorial Hospital in Eunice, where the surgery had been performed.

Plaintiff went to the Hospital early on the day of the accident to stay with her daughter. She left somewhere between 5:30 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. and was accompanied by Orena Estes, her daughter's mother-in-law, and Mrs. Estes' grandson, Mark Estes. Plaintiff and her two companions exited from the Hospital via the front entranceway. That entranceway slopes downward toward a "roll over" curb 1. Plaintiff fell when she stepped onto the curb, which separates the entranceway from a circular driveway in front of the Hospital's building.

Plaintiff sustained a fracture of her left hip and was immediately taken to the emergency room of the Hospital. She received initial treatment there and was then admitted. Dr. R. E. Landreneau performed an open reduction on plaintiff's left hip the next day and she remained in the Hospital until she was discharged on January 5, 1979. She was then taken to the Basile Care Center, a nursing home.

Plaintiff returned to the Hospital on January 16, 1979, complaining of pain in her left hip. Dr. Landreneau referred plaintiff to Dr. R. Luke Bordelon in Opelousas, and she was admitted to Opelousas General Hospital on January 17, 1979. X-rays showed that the fracture of plaintiff's left hip was displaced. A second operation was performed on plaintiff in which a metal prosthesis 2 was used to replace the ball of her hip joint. Plaintiff remained in Opelousas General Hospital until her discharge on February 16, 1979.

Plaintiff then went to her daughter's home in Basile. She fell once more on February 23, 1979, and suffered an impacted or compression fracture of her left wrist. She was taken to the emergency room of the Moosa Memorial Hospital, where a cast was placed on her wrist, and released.

Plaintiff instituted this action on December 7, 1979, alleging that as she walked out of the Hospital via the front entranceway a car approached with its headlights on, temporarily blinding her. She then lost her balance on the sloping walkway and fell on the concrete surface causing her to suffer the injuries complained of. She further alleged that her injuries were caused solely by certain negligent acts and/or omissions of the Hospital. Defendants denied plaintiff's allegations of negligent conduct on the part of the Hospital or that such conduct was the sole, proximate cause of her injuries. Defendants also plead the affirmative defense of contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff.

HOSPITAL'S ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE

Plaintiff contends that the sole, proximate causes of her injuries were the following alleged negligent acts and/or omissions of the Hospital: constructing and maintaining an unsafe entrance-exit to be used by the public; failing to place warning signs informing the public of the uneven walking area in the area of the entrance-exit ramp; providing a driveway for motor vehicles in an area where their headlights may blind persons exiting through the front main entrance, or else will create a dangerous hazard by passing too close to one using the entrance; failing to provide some sort of supportive device for handicapped, elderly, or other persons requiring such supports, such as handrails or a doorman to assist those individuals requiring such help; and, failing to properly inspect, maintain, and supervise the front entrance-exit. Plaintiff's claim is based on the provisions of LSA-C.C. Articles 2315 and 2316.

The first inquiry in making a determination of liability under these articles is whether any causal relationship exists between the harm suffered by plaintiff and the Hospital's alleged negligent conduct. Thus, if plaintiff can show that she probably would not have suffered the injuries complained of but for the Hospital's conduct, she has carried her burden of proof relative to cause-in-fact. Shelton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, 334 So.2d 406 (La.1976); Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc., 260 La. 542, 256 So.2d 620 (1972); Vidrine v. Missouri Farm Association, 339 So.2d 877 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1976), writ denied, 342 So.2d 216 (La.1977); Stewart v. Gibson Products of Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana, Inc., 300 So.2d 870 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1974).

The trial court found that plaintiff failed to prove that her fall was caused by "any negligence of the defendant, Moosa Memorial Hospital". Plaintiff argues that the trial court committed manifest error in making this finding.

In resolving the question of whether an act or acts of a defendant were a cause-in-fact of the harm suffered by a plaintiff, we make no inquiry as to whether the act or acts were unlawful or negligent. We determine only whether they were a substantial factor without which the accident would not have occurred, i.e., whether they had some direct relationship to the accident. Laird v. Travelers Insurance Co., 263 La. 199, 267 So.2d 714 (1972); Pierrotti v. Associated Indemnity Corp., 399 So.2d 679 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1981).

The evidence shows that the entranceway where plaintiff fell consisted of a sloping concrete walkway that ended at a curb. Both the walkway and the curb were covered by a dark-colored mat that was approximately six feet wide. The walkway sloped downward at an angle of 2.07 degrees from horizontal for a distance of 1.1 feet beginning at the doors to the Hospital's building. The slope then increased to an angle of 6.7 degrees from horizontal for a distance of 3.4 feet ending at the curb. The curb itself sloped downward at angles of 19.95 degrees from horizontal for a distance of .6 feet and 22.8 degrees from horizontal for a distance of .35 feet. The curb ended at the circular driveway.

Plaintiff contends that she fell because the Hospital failed to place signs warning of the uneven walking surface and concealed the presence of the curb with the mat. Plaintiff testified that she and her two companions walked out of the double doors in front of the Hospital's building and "just as I got at the end of the slope or whatever you call it, it slopes down, I started to step down and it seems like I just-there wasn't a step there and I just went down". Plaintiff, at the request of counsel, marked a photograph of the entranceway to show where she fell. She indicated that she fell at the end of the walkway where the curb is located. Mrs. Estes also testified that plaintiff fell at that spot. The photographs, together with the testimony of a number of the witnesses, indicate that there were no handrails in this area. Plaintiff argues that all of the above were substantial factors without which the accident would not have occurred.

Defendants, on the other hand, contend that the mat was placed over the walkway and curb for safety. They note that the curb was painted a bright yellow and could be clearly seen on each side of the mat. Douglas Longman, the Administrator of the Hospital, testified that he had no personal knowledge of anyone having fallen on the entranceway in the 18 years that he has been affiliated with the Hospital. However, he did admit that someone could have fallen without injuring himself and, as a result, he may have received no notification of the accident.

We find that plaintiff has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she probably would not have suffered the injuries complained of but for the Hospital's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
34 cases
  • Sibley v. Board of Sup'rs of Louisiana State University
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 18 Septiembre 1985
    ...to provide adequate procedures for the maintenance of safety and sanitation in its grounds and buildings, Head v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 408 So.2d 1174 (La.App. 3d Cir.1982); Roark v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 415 So.2d 295 (La.App. 2d Cir.1982). A breach of one of these du......
  • Williams v. Exxon Corp.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 6 Febrero 1989
    ...the acts complained of were a substantial factor without which the accident would not have occurred. Head v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 408 So.2d 1174 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1982). The trial court's finding was obviously correct, and the only duty breached was the mutual obligation of Mic......
  • Pitts v. Bailes
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 4 Octubre 1989
    ...future or how much it would cost, we cannot say that the jury may have erred in not awarding this item. See Head v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 408 So.2d 1174 (La.App. 3rd Cir.), writ. denied, 412 So.2d 99 Pitts, without any specificity, argues that the record supports an award for pos......
  • Latour v. Steamboats, LLC
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 7 Diciembre 2022
    ... ... Courville v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 16-556, 16-557 ... (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/8/17), ... building and fire codes, the design and maintenance of ... anything one ... Head ... v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. , 408 So.2d ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Premises Liability Law
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Slip and Fall Practice Part One. Case Evaluation
    • 6 Mayo 2012
    ...of the existence of any obstacles or dangers that may present a hazard to such individuals. Head v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. , 408 So. 2d 1174 (La. App. 1982). Due to the potential diminished capacity of its patients, a hospital may be required to “use greater care towards its patien......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT