Rhodes v. Jordan

Decision Date05 December 1934
Docket Number4891
Citation157 So. 811
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
PartiesRHODES v. JORDAN, Sheriff, et al

Rehearing denied January 9, 1935.

Bertram V. Barnette, of Arcadia, and Chris Barnette, of Shreveport for appellant.

Hardin & Coleman, of Shreveport, for appellees.

OPINION

DREW Judge.

Due to the seriousness with which defendants urge the exception of no cause of action in this court, we feel that it is advisable to quote the petition of plaintiff, with the exception of the prayer. It is as follows:

"The petition of Alfred M. Rhodes, a resident of the Parish of Bienville, State of Louisiana who with respect represents:

"1. That Henderson Jordan is the duly elected, qualified and acting Sheriff of Bienville Parish, Louisiana, and was so during the month of October, 1932, and that the said Henderson Jordan, Sheriff of Bienville Parish, Louisiana, and Sun Indemnity Company of New York, New York, a foreign insurance corporation doing business in the State of Louisiana, are justly and legally indebted unto your petitioner in solido in the full and just sum of $ 10,245.85 with legal interest thereon from date of judicial demand until paid, and all costs of this suit.

"2. Your petitioner alleges that on or about the 10th day of October, 1932, while he was at his home about three miles southwest of the Town of Gibbsland, Louisiana, Henderson Jordan, Sheriff of Bienville Parish, Louisiana, and P. M. Oakley, his duly authorized deputy, Dave Armstrong, Night Marshal for the Town of Gibbsland, and A. D. Williams, Day Marshal of the Town of Gibbsland, came to his home and accused him of having been drunk and disorderly and with disturbing the peace in the town of Gibbsland on or about the 8th day of October, 1932, and told your petitioner that he would have to pay a heavy fine for it unless he would assist the Sheriff of Bienville Parish and his deputies in apprehending the "bootleggers' and "moonshiners' from whom he had obtained his whiskey, and assured him that if he would disclose their identity and point out the location of the stills to the Sheriff, no charges would be lodged against him, and then told him to "think the proposition over' and they would return in a few days for his answer.

"3. That on or about the night of October 22, 1932, your petitioner was in the town of Gibbsland and that in the early part of the night or late afternoon, said Dave Armstrong, Night Marshal for the Town of Gibbsland, asked your petitioner if he was ready to go with him and the "Sheriff' to point out the location of the stills and disclose the identity of the bootleggers and moonshiners, but that your petitioner answered that it was impossible for him to go at that time. Whereupon, said Dave Armstrong called by telephone P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff of Bienville Parish, Louisiana. Whereupon said P. M. Oakley came to Gibbsland and told your petitioner that he was ready to go after the bootleggers and moonshiners and that your petitioner must go with him, to which your petitioner protested. But notwithstanding his protest, the said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff, acting in his official capacity, compelled your petitioner to get in his automobile and go with him and that your petitioner did get in the automobile with the said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff, and said Dave Armstrong, which was against your petitioner's will, and that he did so only upon order and command of the said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff.

"4. That the said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff, put your petitioner in the automobile with him and the said Dave Armstrong and drove away from the town of Gibbsland, out what is known as the Oak Grove Road and that he, the said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff, acting in his official capacity, told your petitioner again that if he would point out the location of the stills and disclose the identity of the bootleggers and moonshiners, that he would not be prosecuted, but that if he failed to do so, he would be prosecuted and subjected to payment of a heavy fine and a jail sentence, and that your petitioner was then under arrest and forced to accede to the demands of the said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff, acting in his official capacity.

"5. That the said P. M. Oakley drove the automobile in which they were riding somewhere on the Oak Grove Road and let the aforesaid Dave Armstrong get out of the car. Whereupon he immediately proceeded to Bryceland, where he got one T. H. Taylor, duly authorized and empowered Deputy Sheriff of Bienville Parish, Louisiana, acting under the official direction of the said Henderson Jordan, Sheriff of Bienville Parish, and that the said P. M. Oakley and T. H. Taylor were then and there acting in the discharge of their duties as deputy sheriffs and that they acted as agents, employees and authorized deputies of the said Henderson Jordan, Sheriff of Bienville Parish, and that their said acts were the official acts of the said Henderson Jordan, Sheriff.

"6. That the said P. M. Oakley operated a Ford Sedan automobile owned and used by Henderson Jordan, Sheriff of Bienville Parish, in his official duties and that same was operated by said P. M. Oakley, Deputy Sheriff, in the discharge of his duties as aforesaid, and that your petitioner occupied the front seat of said automobile, which was driven by said P. M. Oakley and that the said T. H. Taylor, occupied the rear seat of said automobile.

"7. That your petitioner was then under arrest and in the custody of Henderson Jordan, Sheriff of Bienville Parish, who was acting through the said duly authorized and empowered deputies, P. M. Oakley and T. H. Taylor.

"8. That your petitioner was taken in said automobile to the vicinity of Black Lake, where he attempted to locate a still and its operators, upon order, threat of prosecution if he failed to do so, and promise of reward for so doing, made by said deputies, but that he was unable to locate same and that he, in company with said deputies as aforesaid drove back toward the town of Gibbsland, in Bienville Parish, over what is known as the Oak Grove Road.

"9. That as they neared the town of Gibbsland, it being somewhere near midnight, your petitioner objected to the manner in which P. M. Oakley drove and operated the automobile in which they were riding and particularly did he remonstrate with said Oakley about the dangerous rate of speed, at which he was driving, and further told said P. M. Oakley, who was driving said automobile, as above alleged, that the road was very hilly and crooked and that he had better watch out for the curves and hills, but that, notwithstanding his protest, the said Oakley continued to drive said automobile in a very careless, reckless, dangerous and negligent manner.

"10. That at a point approximately two miles from the town of Gibbsland, on said Oak Grove Road, at which point being very hilly and crooked, your petitioner again protested against the manner in which said Oakley operated said automobile and made the remark to said Oakley that he had better be careful going over that hill because there was a curve just over the top and that he was afraid the car would be wrecked.

"11. That the said Oakley ignored his protest and continued to drive the automobile in a very careless, reckless and negligent manner and that as he approached and mounted the crest of the hill, the head lights on the automobile reflected up and off said road in such manner that the said Oakley apparently did not see the curve about which your petitioner had just warned him and that the said Oakley did not follow the road around the curve, but drove off the road and into the ditch alongside.

"12. That at the time said Oakley was driving said automobile at a very rapid rate of speed, approximately 60 miles an hour, over the protest of your petitioner, and that because of his excessive speed, gross carelessness and negligence, said automobile was wrecked and that in some manner, unknown to your petitioner, he was thrown out of the automobile, and fell into the highway, inflicting serious and permanent injuries more particularly set forth hereinafter and that said automobile ran into the ditch alongside the road and turned over.

"13. That the force with which your petitioner was thrown out of said automobile into the road was so great and the impact with which he struck the road was so great that he was seriously and permanently injured, more particularly, that your petitioner sustained a cortical fracture of the upper anterior border of the body of the eleventh dorsal vertebra, with the resulting lipping of the lumbar vertebra and calcification in the lateral ligaments around same.

"14. That said injuries were very painful and are at present the source of great pain to him and that same are permanent and render him incapable of ever, during the balance of his natural life, performing any manual labor.

"15. Your petitioner alleges that he was at the time of said injury 48 years of age and that he was a farmer and that in the course of his business he performed manual labor; that he is not prepared for the performance of any other kind of work for a livelihood and that since he has been permanently and totally disabled from performing the manual labor incident to the exercise of his business as a farmer, he has suffered great damage, as is more fully shown hereinafter.

"16. For treatment, T. E. Schumpert Memorial Sanitarium,

Shreveport

$ 117.75

Supplies for treatment

1.55

Dr. B. C. Garrett

100.00

Dr. O. L. Kidd

25.00

Wilson Drug Company

1.55

"17. Your petitioner alleges that his damage is as follows:

Hospital, doctor's bill and medical

supplies, as above alleged

$ 245.85

Pain and suffering

2,000.00

For permanent total disability

8,000.00

Total

$ 10,245.85

"18. That said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Gates v. Hanover Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 3 Febrero 1969
    ...negligent operation of an automobile causing injury to a man under arrest and being transported in the automobile, Rhodes v. Jordan, 157 So. 811 (La.App .2d Cir. 1934). In this case there was the additional circumstance of a public liability insurance policy covering the automobile in which......
  • State v. Warren
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 24 Septiembre 1973
    ... ... Rodriguez v. Hanchey, 359 F.2d 724 (5 Cir. 1966), certiorari denied 385 U.S. 884, 87 S.Ct. 179, 17 L.Ed.2d 112.1 See also Rhodes v. Jordan, 157 So. 811 (La.App.1934) which states: 'When one is detained by an officer against his will, he is under arrest and in the custody of ... ...
  • Andrews v. Kirk
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 30 Octubre 1958
    ...204. A prisoner who is being transported in an automobile under compulsion of the police, is not a guest passenger. Cf. Rhodes v. Jordan, La.App.1934, 157 So. 811. A kidnapped or adducted person who is driven in a car is an involuntary guest rider and is outside the statute. See Green v. Jo......
  • Rodriguez v. Hanchey
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 3 Mayo 1966
    ...drawer. This restraint would appear to fit within the definition of "arrest" in L.R.S. § 15:58. This is borne out by Rhodes v. Jordan, La.Ct.App. 1934, 157 So. 811, where the Louisiana court stated: "When one is detained by an officer against his will, he is under arrest and in the custody ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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