Michel Bros., Inc. v. Mallynn

• Decision Date: 02 November 1925
• Docket Number: 10,116
• Citation: Michel Bros., Inc. v. Mallynn, 3 La.App. 69 (La. App. 1925)
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana
• Parties: MICHEL BROS., INC., v. CHARLES MALLYNN, Appellant

3 La.App. 69

MICHEL BROS., INC., v. CHARLES MALLYNN, Appellant

No. 10,116

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Orleans

November 2, 1925

Appeal from the First City Court of New Orleans, Section "C"; Hon. William V. Seeber, Judge.

This is a suit for damages arising out of an automobile accident. There was judgment for plaintiff and defendant appealed.

Judgment affirmed.

Woodville and Woodville, of New Orleans, attorneys for plaintiff appellee.

Daly and Hamlin, of New Orleans, attorneys for defendant appellant.

OPINION

BELL J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment awarding the plaintiff $ 103.45, the amount representing necessary repairs to to two automobiles belonging to plaintiff. With one of these cars, defendant's automobile collided, causing damages to both of plaintiff's cars. The accident occurred about three o'clock on the morning of November 1, 1923, in the City of New Orleans, at the intersection of the Spanish Fort road and Canal Boulevard.

The drivers of the three cars were all returning from Halloween parties at Spanish Fort, where they had spent the greater part of the night. The plaintiff's cars were an "Overland" and a "Ford". The former became disabled because of some portion of the car's mechanism being loosened or disconnected. For this reason, the driver of the Overland car had stopped and parked on the right hand side of the Spanish Fort road, the car heading toward the New Basin Canal, in order that the driver might repair the engine trouble which prevented him from going further on his journey. While the Overland car was in this position between the two roadways on Canal Boulevard, as these roadways intersected the Spanish Fort road, the driver of the Ford car coming up behind and finding that the Overland car driven by his brother was in trouble, drove the Ford car to the extreme right of the Spanish Fort road, turning it around so that its headlights would shine directly on the front of the Overland car. While both cars were parked in this headon position, and well to the right of the road, the trouble in the Overland car had almost been rectified when defendant's automobile, also coming from the direction of Spanish Fort, smashed into the rear of the Overland car and threw it in turn against the Ford car, causing the damages which have been claimed and allowed.

The plaintiff charges defendant with negligence in that he was driving at a dangerous and reckless speed, and in such a careless manner as to cause the accident which could have been easily avoided. The defendant answers by averring that the municipal lights at the junction of the roadways were not burning; that the plaintiff's Ford car was not parked to the right of the Spanish Fort road nor fronting toward the New Basin Canal, like the Overland car, but was, in fact parked in the middle of the roadway, against traffic, and facing the direction from which defendant was traveling; that the glaring headlights on the Ford car blinded defendant's vision so as to prevent him from seeing any obstructions on the right of the roadway, directly in front of him. It is also charged that all of the lights, particularly the tail light on the Overland car, were not burning, thus depriving defendant of the opportunity of knowing or seeing the danger ahead of him. It is finally charged that both of the palintiff's cars were parked in an intersection and not twenty-five feet therefrom. The city traffic ordinances in reference to parking and lighting of motor vehicles, are cited and pleaded by de...