From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ponselle v. Armstrong

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Jun 24, 1965
176 So. 2d 464 (La. Ct. App. 1965)

Opinion

No. 1422.

June 2, 1965. Rehearing Denied June 24, 1965.

APPEAL FROM TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF NATCHITOCHES, JULIAN E. BAILES, J.

Thomas Friedman, Natchitoches, by Leroy H. Scott, Jr., Shreveport, Gerard F. Thomas, Jr., Natchitoches, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Gist, Gist, Methvin Trimble, by DeWitt T. Methvin, Jr., Alexandria, for defendants-appellants, U.S.F. G.

Mayer Smith, by Alex F. Smith, Jr., Shreveport, for defendants-appellants, Traders General and Charles R. Armstrong.

Bodenheimer, Looney Jones, by G. M. Bodenheimer, Jr., Shreveport, for defendant-appellee, Central Mutal.

Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin Roberts, by Wilton H. Williams, Jr., Shreveport, for defendant-appellee, Traders Indemnity Co.

Before TATE, FRUGÉ, and SAVOY, Judges.


In the companion appeal rendered this date, Peterson v. Armstrong, 176 So.2d 453, all issues of this appeal have been decided except the plaintiff's prayer for an increase in the award, and the defendants' request for a reduction therein.

The plaintiff was awarded $750 general damages, plus $172.50 special damages for her medical expenses. She received a severe contusion of the forehead and certain painful knee and ankle abrasions, from which she recovered in two to three months with no residual disability. According to her testimony, there was a small residual scar on the shin, but the trial court seems to have evaluated that as minimal if existent. See Dr. Plunkett, leg abrasions had "disappeared", Tr. 253.

The trial court's award of general damages will not be disturbed as within its large discretion in the matter. Ballard v. National Indemnity Co., 246 La. 963, 169 So.2d 64. As to the plaintiff's request for an allowance of an additional $105 medical expenses, the trial court properly disallowed these as for examinations for purposes of preparing for trial rather than for expenses of medical treatment. McDaniel v. Audubon Ins. Co., La. App. 1 Cir., 121 So.2d 531; see also Langley v. Travelers Ins. Co., La. App. 3 Cir., 159 So.2d 553.

For the foregoing reasons, the trial court judgment is affirmed, at the cost of the defendants-appellants.

Affirmed.

On Application for Rehearing.

En Banc. Rehearing denied.


Summaries of

Ponselle v. Armstrong

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Jun 24, 1965
176 So. 2d 464 (La. Ct. App. 1965)
Case details for

Ponselle v. Armstrong

Case Details

Full title:Laura Jean PONSELLE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles R. ARMSTRONG et al.…

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit

Date published: Jun 24, 1965

Citations

176 So. 2d 464 (La. Ct. App. 1965)

Citing Cases

Peterson v. Armstrong

In the present opinion, we will discuss the issues common to all four consolidated appeals. Quantum will be…

Miller v. Thomas

With that admonition in mind, we have compared awards in other cases and have found none in which an award…