Jenkins v. Bogalusa Coca Cola Bottling Co.
| Decision Date | 14 April 1941 |
| Docket Number | 2219. |
| Citation | 1 So.2d 426 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
| Parties | JENKINS et al. v. BOGALUSA COCA COLA BOTTLING COL, Ltd., et al. |
O.H Carter, of Franklinton, for appellants.
Benj. W. Miller, of Bogalusa, and Frank T. Doyle, of New Orleans for appellees.
Mres Rosetta Jenkins seeks to recover damages in the sum of $5,000 from the Bogalusa Coca Cola Bottling Company, Ltd. (hereafter called the company) and its insurance carrier, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, on account of mental anguish, suffering, injury to her health and loss of time which she alleges was caused from drinking decayed parts of a spider or other deleterious foreign substance in a bottle of coca cola manufactured by the company and sold to her and her husband by the City Drug Store of Bogalusa on July 24, 1939. Her husband sues for $100 medical expenses incurred by him in treating his wife for the illness which he alleges resulted from drinking said deleterious foreign substance in said bottle of coca cola.
Plaintiffs allege that they purchased two bottles of coca cola from the City Drug Store,and said bottles were opened by an employee of said drug store who placed a straw in them and handed a bottle to Mrs. Jenkins and one to her husband; that each of them began to drink said coca cola through said straw, and when Mrs. Jenkins took the first swallow she became deathly sick; that she sought some place to vomit and was shown to a rest room where she vomited and became so weak that she had to be assisted in getting about; that she was taken to the office of Dr. Ward on the second floor of the drug store building where she was treated by this doctor for several hours before she could go home; that she suffered for several weeks as a result of this illness and was treated by Dr Ward. She further alleges that while she was in the office of Dr. Ward, he examined the contents of the bottle from which she had drunk the coca cola and found a foreign substance therein which appeared to be a spider, and which foreign substance was the direct and sole cause of her desperate illness. The allegation is also made that the bottle of coca cola was purchased by the said drug store from the defendant company and it had not been opened or tampered with since leaving the plant of the manufacturer that the said bottle of coca cola was negligently manufactured, bottled and handled by said company, the particular acts of negligence not being alleged as they constitute a case of res ipsa loquitur.
Defendants admit that plaintiffs purchased the bottles from the City Drug Store and that these bottles were manufactured and bottled by the company, and they admit that plaintiffs drank from these bottles as alleged; but they deny that there was any foreign substance in said bottle from which Mrs. Jenkins drank; deny that she was made ill from drinking anything in said bottle, and deny that there was any deleterious foreign substance in said bottle when it left the company's plant, and aver that if there was any foreign substance in said bottle, it was placed there by some third person after the bottle left its plant. It is also alleged in the answer that said coca cola was bottled by the most modern and scientific process and with the greatest care and by the use of the most modern machinery, and for this reason it was impossible for a foreign substance to get in this bottle during the process of manufacturing.
The trial judge rendered a judgment in favor of the defendants, rejecting the demands of the plaintiffs, and they have appealed.
In the recent case of Auzenne v. Gulf Public Service Company, La.App., 181 So. 54, 56, we said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lartigue v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company
...1950, 45 So.2d 442; White v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., La.App. 2 Cir., 1943, 16 So.2d 579; Jenkins v. Bogalusa Coca Cola Bottling Co., La.App., 1st Cir., 1941, 1 So.2d 426; Hollis v. Ouachita Coca-Cola Bottling Co., La.App. 2d Cir., 1940, 196 So. 376; Dye v. American Beverage Co., La.App.Orl.......
-
Le Blanc v. Louisiana Coca Cola Bottling Co.
...manufacturer's possession. Nichols v. Louisiana Coca-Cola Bottling Co., Ltd., La.App., 46 So.2d 695, Orleans; Jenkins v. Bogalusa Coca Cola Bottling Co., Ltd., La.App., 1 So.2d 426, First Circuit; Day v. Hammond Coca Cola Bottling Co., La.App., 53 So.2d 447, First Circuit; White v. Coca-Col......
-
Jordan v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. of Utah
...Jones, 24 Tenn.App. 36, 139 S.W.2d 416; Hoback v. Coca Cola Bottling Works, 20 Tenn.App. 280, 98 S.W.2d 113; Jenkins v. Bogalusa Coca Cola Bottling Co., La.App. 1941, 1 So.2d 426; for cases holding that plaintiff failed to establish with sufficient certainty that foreign objects were in bot......
-
Tafoya v. Las Cruces Coca-Cola Bottling Co.
...Co., 1951, 343 Ill.App. 1, 98 N.E.2d 164; Day v. Hammond Coca Cola Bottling Co., La.App.1951, 53 So.2d 447; Jenkins v. Bogalusa Coca Cola Bottling Co., La.App.1941, 1 So.2d 426; Rozumailski v. Philadelphia Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 1929, 296 Pa. 114, 145 A. 700; and Coca-Cola Bottling Works v......