Herlong v. Arkmo Lumber Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Payton v. Great American Indemnity Co.

    83 So. 2d 575 (La. Ct. App. 1956)   Cited 16 times

    Simpson v. Pardue, 15 La.App. 341, 131 So. 854; Synigol v. Oury, 17 La.App. 163, 134 So. 324. In Herlong v. Arkmo Lumber Co., La.App., 53 So.2d 423, an automobile driver, who was traveling at a speed of 21 to 25 miles per hour and who had a clear view of the intersection, hit the right rear side of a truck which had approached the intersection from the left, traveling about 10 miles per hour and was just completing a turn at the intersection and which the driver had failed to see until just before the collision, was held negligent for failure to keep a proper lookout. From the facts of this case, the conclusion is inescapable that the negligence of Cesmer Gallien was the sole and proximate cause of the accident and the injuries and damages resulting therefrom and that Payton was free from negligence proximately causing or contributing to said accident.

  2. Simmons v. Willis

    73 So. 2d 475 (La. Ct. App. 1954)   Cited 1 times

    In any event, the conclusion is inescapable that the driver of plaintiff's car was free of any acts of negligence or of contributory negligence. Defendant strongly relies upon the case of Herlong v. Arkmo Lumber Company, La. App., 53 So.2d 423. The cited case was clearly and conclusively distinguished by our learned brother of the district court in his written opinion on application for rehearing in the following words: "It is true that the general facts are similar, but vastly different on a crucial point.