Wyche v. Brian
| Decision Date | 31 October 1946 |
| Docket Number | 6935. |
| Citation | 28 So.2d 143 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
| Parties | WYCHE v. BRIAN. |
Rehearing Denied Dec. 12, 1946.
Cook Clark & Egan and C. B. Prothro, all of Shreveport, for appellant,
Julius T. Long, of Shreveport, for appellee.
Plaintiff brought this suit to recover damages sustained in an intersectional automobile collision, and defendant reconvened in damages. There was judgment rejecting the demands of both plaintiff and defendant, from which judgment plaintiff appealed, and the defendant answered.
The facts show that at about 9:45 A.M., December 11, 1943, plaintiff was driving a 1941 Chevrolet automobile north on Creswell Street in the City of Shreveport, when, at the intersection with Wilkinson Street, there was a collision with a 1930 model Chevrolet automobile, which was being driven east on Wilkinson Street by the defendant.
We have found little difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the judgment of the lower Court is correct, and find it unnecessary to go beyond the testimony of plaintiff and defendant respectively in order to amply justify such result.
Creswell Street is a right-of-way thoroughfare, so designated by city ordinance, which requires all traffic on intersecting streets to come to a stop before crossing same. Defendant properly brought her automobile to a stop on Wilkinson Street, and according to her testimony, looked carefully in both directions north and south along Creswell. Defendant repeatedly testified on trial of this case that she did not observe any traffic whatsoever on Creswell Street approaching the intersection for a distance of several hundred feet in either direction This testimony was, to a degree, rebutted by the introduction of defendant's signed statement, given a short time after the accident, in which she declared that the had seen a car approaching the intersection several hundred feet to the south. In our minds this minor discrepancy is unimportant. Defendant proceeded to enter the intersection at a speed of about five miles per hour and did not see plaintiff's car until the moment of impact, which took place a few feet beyond the center of the intersection.
Plaintiff testified that he was proceeding at a speed of about twenty-five miles per hour and that he did not see defendant's automobile until it was about six feet away.
There is no testimony which would indicate the existence of any obstruction which would have interfered with the view of either plaintiff or defendant had either been keeping a proper and reasonable lookout.
The only possible conclusion which may be drawn from the facts as testified by plaintiff and defendant is to the effect that plaintiff, driving at a reasonable speed on a right-of-way street, could have seen, but did not see, defendant crossing the intersection until her car was almost upon his own, and that defendant made no attempt to continue a lookout for traffic on Creswell Street despite the fact that at a speed of five miles an hour she could have brought her car to an almost immediate stop upon observing a vehicle approaching the intersection.
The actions of the defendant in this case are strikingly similar to those of the plaintiff in the case of Mese v. Summers...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co., Civ. A. No. 2873.
... ... Matthews v. New Orleans Terminal Co., La.App., 45 So.2d 547; Hutchinson v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., La.App., 33 So.2d 139; Wyche v. Brian, La.App., 28 So.2d 143; Louisiana & Arkansas Ry. Co. v. Jackson, 5 Cir., 95 F.2d 369; Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Taulbee, 9 Cir., 92 F.2d 20; ... ...
-
Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Laborde
...held to have seen it. Sullivan v. Locke, La.App., 73 So.2d 616; Matthews v. New Orleans Terminal Co., La. App., 45 So.2d 547; Wyche v. Brian, La.App., 28 So.2d 143; Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co., La.App., 85 So.2d 87. As to the cases on which appellee relies, we think......
-
Martin v. Adams
...v. Locke, supra; General Exchange Ins. Corporation v. Carp, La.App., 176 So. 145; Comeaux v. Blanchet, La.App., 69 So.2d 527; Wyche v. Brian, La.App., 28 So.2d 143. Manifest error in the judgment appealed has not been pointed out and our own review of the record fails to disclose any such e......
-
Bush v. Williams
...So.2d 717; Gross v. Teche Lines, 1945, 207 La. 354, 21 So.2d 378; Firemen's Ins. Co. v. Boggs, La.App. 1945, 23 So.2d 630; Wyche v. Brian, La.App., 1947, 28 So.2d 143; Gachassin v. Richard, La.App., 1947, 28 So.2d 371; Fidelity & Guaranty Fire Corp. v. Ritter, La.App., 1948, 37 So.2d 349; H......