Waddell v. Bickham

Decision Date05 April 1983
Docket NumberNo. 82,82
Citation431 So.2d 59
PartiesPatricia B. WADDELL v. Benton BICKHAM, III, et al. CA 0594.
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

Iddo Pittman, Jr., Hammond, for defendant-appellee, Benton Bickham, III.

James E. Kuhn, Denham Springs, for defendant-appellee, Tangi Broadcasting Co.

David V. Batt, Metairie, for defendant-appellee, Hood Motor Co.

Richard Macaluso, Hammond, for plaintiff-appellant.

Before EDWARDS, WATKINS and SHORTESS, JJ.

WATKINS, Judge.

Patricia B. Waddell and her husband, Donald Waddell, instituted this action against Benton Bickham III; his employer, Tangi Broadcasting Company, Inc., d/b/a WTGI Radio; the registered owner of the car leased and driven by Mr. Bickham, Hood Motor Company, Inc.; and the respective insurers of the defendants.

Subsequently, the defendant WTGI moved for, and the trial court granted, summary judgment in favor of WTGI on the ground that no genuine issue of material fact existed as to WTGI, inasmuch as Mr. Bickham was not acting within the course or scope of his employment at the time of the accident sued upon.

From the judgment dismissing WTGI as a defendant in the lawsuit, Mr. and Mrs. Waddell appeal. We affirm.

The principal issue presented on appeal is whether, based on the deposition, pleadings, and affidavits filed by the parties pursuant to WTGI's motion for summary judgment, a genuine issue of material fact was presented, and whether WTGI is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.

The purpose of summary judgment is to provide a procedural device to determine, prior to trial, whether there is or is not a genuine issue of material fact. Miller v. East Ascension Telephone Co., 263 So.2d 360 (La.App. 1st Cir.1972), writ denied 262 La. 1121, 266 So.2d 430 (1972). If the movant produces convincing proof by affidavits or other receivable evidence of fact upon which the motion is based, and no counter affidavits or other receivable proof are offered by the opposing party to contradict that proof, the conclusion may be justified that there is no genuine issue as to the facts so proved. Haley v. City of Opelousas, 347 So.2d 903 (La.App. 3d Cir.1977).

Here, WTGI introduced an affidavit signed by the defendant Mr. Bickham stating that he was not acting within the course or scope of his employment at the time of the accident sued upon. Additionally, the deposition of Mr. Bickham, perpetuated at the instance of the plaintiff, reveals that Mr. Bickham was clearly not acting within the course or scope of his employment. At the deposition Mr. Bickham testified to the following: That he possessed both a company car and a personal car, and at the time of the accident he was driving his personal car to the grocery store to buy some steaks which he intended to take home and freeze....

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Sandbom v. BASF Wyandotte Corp.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • April 23, 1993
    ...the opposing party, the conclusion may be justified that there is no dispute as to the material facts so proved. Waddell v. Bickham, 431 So.2d 59, 60 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983). At issue is whether the trial court erred in judgment. The trial court, in its reasons for granting summary judgment,......
  • Vanderbrook v. Coachmen Industries, Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • May 10, 2002
    ...that evidence, the conclusion may be justified that there is no genuine issue as to the facts so proved. See Waddell v. Bickham, 431 So.2d 59, 60 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1983). Paw Paw's contends that the Vanderbrooks' affidavits contain opinion evidence requiring expert testimony. Specifically, Pa......
  • Capital Bank & Trust Co. v. Wall
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • April 3, 1984
    ...that material facts are still at issue. La.C.C.P. arts. 966 and 967; Mashburn v. Collin, 355 So.2d 879 (La.1977); Waddell v. Bickham, 431 So.2d 59 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983); Broussard v. Henry, 423 So.2d 67 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982); Schoemann v. Turnwood Development Corp., 421 So.2d 353 (La.App.......
  • Fisk v. Mathews
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • April 19, 1988
    ...against the motion because of the movant's failure to comply with discovery is insufficient to defeat the motion. Waddell v. Bickham, 431 So.2d 59 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983). In the present case, defendant neither specified the nature of the facts he hoped to discover nor showed that he made an......
  • 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