 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Henry v. Parsons11/29/2005
Panel composed of Judges James L. Cannella, Marion F. Edwards, and Susan M. Chehardy
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, RECAST AND RENDERED
This appeal from the Second Parish Court of Jefferson Parish arises in three consolidated cases concerning a May 31, 2001 two-car collision at the intersection of Holmes Boulevard and Behrman Highway. At issue is the trial court's dismissal of the injury claim of a passenger in one of the vehicles. We reverse the judgment insofar as it dismissed that claim and render judgment as set out below.
Lashon D. Henry was driver of one car; Goldie H. Parson was driver of the other car. Clarice Guidry was a passenger in Parson's vehicle. Henry sued Parson and her insurer, Allstate Insurance Company; Parson sued Henry and her insurer (also Allstate Insurance Company); Guidry, an interdict appearing through her curatrix, Cecilia Rodriguez, sued Henry, Parson, and Allstate as insurer for each driver.
After trial, at which each driver claimed to have had the green light at the intersection, the court rendered judgment in favor of Lashon Henry and against Goldie Parson and Allstate Insurance Company in the amounts of $11,250.00 in general damages and $2,957.37 in special damages, for a total of $14,207.37. The court denied the claims of Parson and Guidry.
In written reasons for judgment, the trial court stated:
There were no witnesses who testified as to the accident other than the parties. Although the witnesses were credible, this court finds that the evidence preponderates in favor of Ms. Henry's version of the accident.
This court finds that when confronted with the conflicting versions of the accident, Ms. Henry who came to a stop and then proceeded into the intersection is more likely to have proceeded on the favored signal than the opposing driver. Therefore, this court finds Ms. Parsons solely at fault in the cause of the accident....
According to the testimony Ms. Guidry was involved in a previous accident and in fact treated for the injuries in the previous accident the day prior to the accident that forms the subject of this litigation. There was no evidence to show that this accident caused her injuries for which she treated post accident or that her injuries pre-accident were aggravated from this accident. Therefore, this court finds insufficient evidence to award damages to Ms. Guidry.
Parson and Rodriguez, on behalf of Guidry, appealed the dismissal of their claims. Parson later dismissed her appeal voluntarily. Hence, only the claims of Rodriguez on behalf of Guidry remain before us.
On appeal Rodriguez asserts that the trial court erred in not applying the "guest passenger presumption of negligence" rule, and that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to award general damages, special damages and costs to Cecilia Rodriguez as curatrix on behalf of the interdict, Clarice Guidry.
The guest passenger presumption provides that when an innocent party is injured through the concurrent acts of two parties under circumstances where one or the other must be at fault, the burden is upon these parties to exculpate themselves from negligence. Richardson v. Aldridge, 37,192, p. 5 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/16/03), 854 So.2d 923, 935, writ denied, 03-3034 (La. 2/6/04), 865 So.2d 743. This is an evidentiary rather than a substantive rule, because it does not exempt the plaintiff from the ultimate burden of proving his or her case. Id.
The trial court found Goldie Parson at fault in the accident; that finding is uncontested. Therefore, Rodriguez contends, the trial court erred by failing to rule on the merit of Rodriguez'
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|