Roberie v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America

Citation282 So.2d 834
Decision Date22 August 1973
Docket NumberNo. 9467,9467
PartiesMarion ROBERIE v. SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA.
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana (US)

Wm. H. Cooper, Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Preston N. Aucoin, Ville Platte, for appellee.

Before LANDRY, TUCKER and PICKETT, JJ.

PICKETT, Judge.

This suit was instituted by the plaintiff, Marion Roberie, against the defendant, Safeco Insurance Company of America, the liability insurer of Dennis R. Elliott, to recover damages in the sum of $4,000.00 for the loss of a sweet potato crop. For a cause of action, the plaintiff alleged that on or about October 3, 1970, Dennis R. Elliott, the owner and driver of a 1966 Ford Automobile, negligently drove said vehicle into the rear of a 1964 Ford Automobile, owned and being driven by Rogers Thomas as a result of which the said Rogers Thomas, and his guest passengers, Gloria Nell Thomas, Margaret Thomas, Ruby Clark Thomas and Wilda Clark, all sustained personal injuries. All of the persons injured were share croppers, or relatives of share croppers, of the plaintiff, and because of their injuries and resulting disabilities, they were unable to harvest a sweet potato crop, which they had grown on the plaintiff's farm, and the potatoes valued at $8,000.00 were lost. The plaintiff was the owner of a one-half interest in the sweet potato crop that was lost, and consequently, he sustained a loss of $4,000.00. The defendant answered, alleging its insured, Dennis R. Elliott, was free of fault, and, in the alternative, alleged contributory negligence on the part of Rogers Thomas and his guest passengers. Thereafter, the defendant filed an exception of no cause or right of action, which was overruled by the lower court. After a trial on the merits, the district court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for the sum of $2,100.00, together with legal interest thereon from judicial demand until paid. The defendant has appealed . The plaintiff has answered the appeal, and asked that the award be increased to $4,000.00, together with interest and costs.

There is little dispute as to the facts. The chief issue is whether, on the facts shown, our law supports the plaintiff's claim for damages. It is not disputed that on or about October 3, 1970, an automobile, insured by the defendant, was driven into the rear of an automobile, driven by Rogers Thomas, and occupied by the persons named above. Rogers Thomas and some of his guest passengers were share croppers on the land owned by the plaintiff. Under his agreement with the share croppers, the plaintiff furnished the seed, tools, and all necessary equipment, as well as the living quarters for the share croppers, and they performed the labor required to cultivate and harvest the crop; and the plaintiff was to receive one-half of the crop harvested, and the share croppers were to receive the other one-half of the crop harvested.

Based on the testimony of Rogers Thomas and his guest passengers, the lower court found as a fact that the proximate cause of the automobile accident in which Rogers Thomas, Gloria Nell Thomas, Margaret Thomas, Ruby C. Thomas and Wilda Clark were injured was the negligence of defendant's insured, Dennis R. Elliott. In fact, counsel for the defendant in effect, after the trial of the case, admitted the negligence of his client's insured. Therefore, we deem it unnecessary to analyze the evidence on the question of negligence.

The testimony of the appellee is not disputed that under his arrangement with the share croppers who farmed his land, he would furnish the seed, tools and equipment necessary for the cultivation and harvesting of the crops, as well as living quarters for the share croppers; and the share croppers would perform the labor necessary to cultivate and harvest the crops. When the crops were harvested, the appellee and the sharecroppers shared the crops equally. The appellee usually provided the share croppers with food, clothing, medical attention and transportation. These expenses were repaid to appellee by the sharecroppers out of their one-half of the crop when it was harvested and marketed. The sharecroppers who testified corroborated the testimony of the appellee with reference to their relationship.

The evidence shows that some of the sweet potato crop on appellee's land was lost because it was not harvested. The evidence, also, shows that the sharecroppers who were injured in the accident under consideration did not return to work, after the accident, during the harvesting season in 1970.

The appellee bases his cause of action on the provisions of Louisiana Civil Code Article 174, which reads as follows:

'The master may bring an action against any man for beating or maiming his servant, but in such case he must assign as a cause of action, his own damage arising from the loss of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • offshore Rental Co. v. Continental Oil Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • 18 Septiembre 1978
    ......v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (La.Ct.App.1974) 302 So.2d 316; Roberie v. Safeco Ins. Co. (La.Ct.App.1973) 282 So.2d 834.) .         On ......
  • Youngblood v. Morrison Grain Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana
    • 19 Julio 1978
    ...... a lessee unless it is shown that the share was in lieu of wages, Roberie v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America, 282 So.2d 834, 836 (La.App. 1st Cir. ......
  • Cupit v. Grant
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana (US)
    • 14 Mayo 1986
    ...... a lessee unless it is shown that the share was in lieu of wages, Roberie v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America, 282 So.2d 834, 836 (La.App. 1st ......

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