Heath v. Baudin
| Decision Date | 10 June 1929 |
| Docket Number | 463 |
| Citation | 122 So. 726,11 La.App. 40 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
| Parties | HEATH v. BAUDIN |
Appeal from the District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge. Hon George K. Favrot, Judge.
Action by Marshall Heath against J. H. Baudin.
There was judgment for defendant and plaintiff appealed.
Judgment affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Taylor and Parker, of Baton Rouge, attorneys for plaintiff appellant.
Charles A. Holcombe, of Baton Rouge, attorney for defendant appellee.
Marshall Heath claims $ 425.00 as damages, of J. H. Baudin, on account of an automobile collision in which both of their cars sustained injuries.
The plaintiff claims that the terrific speed of defendant was the cause of the collision.
The defendant avers that it was due to the reckless driving of the plaintiff.
Heath, driving south on Winona Street in suburb Istrouma in the City of Baton Rouge, about 4 o'clock P. M. on August 22, 1928, admits that on approaching the intersection of Huron Street, driving at the rate of 25 or 30 miles an hour and within 20 or 25 feet from its intersection with Winona Street, he saw Baudin coming on Huron Street about 50 feet distant from the intersection.
He was asked on cross-examination:
He subsequently practically admitted that the collision was the result of his effort to get across Huron Street ahead of Baudin, who was approaching and about to cross Winona Street at a right angle. He did not put on his brakes, sound his horn or do anything to avoid a collision; and after seeing Baudin about to enter the intersection, he kept right on without lessening his speed.
In the excitement of the impact plaintiff asked Baudin: "Is the baby hurt?" Upon which Baudin asked him why he did not blow, and he replied, "I thought I could beat you across the street."
The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff to show negligence on the part of the defendant, causing the injury.
The evidence shows that plaintiff caused it himself. Driving too fast, he entered the intersection recklessly, after Baudin had already entered it, and tried to cross it ahead of him by sheer...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hickerson v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co.
... ... Continental Casualty Co., La.App., 169 So. 147; Bagley v. Standard Coffee Co., La.App., 168 So. 350; Heath v. Baudin, 11 La.App. 40, 122 So. 726; Buckley v. Featherstone Garage, 11 La.App. 564, 123 So. 446 ... 'Similarly, the urging of the blind nature of ... ...
-
Teche Lines, Inc. v. Pasavanti
... ... the burden is upon the plaintiff to show fault and negligence ... of the defendant in the collision between the Buick and the ... Heath ... v. Baudin, 122 So. 726 ... The ... collision could not have occurred like plaintiff and her ... witnesses say it did because the ... ...
-
Wilson v. Yellow Cab Co. of Shreveport
... ... Continental Casualty Co., La.App., 169 So. 147; Bagley v. Standard Coffee Co., La.App., 168 So. 350; Heath v. Baudin, 11 La.App. 40, 122 So. 726; Buckley v. Featherstone Garage, 11 La.App., 564, 123 So. 446 ... Similarly, the urging of the ... ...
-
Mathews v. Hayne
... ... that he cannot cross in safety, he should refrain from ... attempting a crossing." ... Under ... this rule, the author refers to Heath v. Baudin, 11 ... La.App. 40, 122 So. 726, in which it was held: " Where ... plaintiff caused the accident by driving too fast, entering ... the ... ...