Case ID: so2d_146/html/0219-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BOLIN, Judge. AYRES, J., HARDY, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Theresa REILEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ATLAS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al, Defendants-Appellants.
    No. 9746.
    Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.
    June 14, 1962.
    On Rehearing Oct. 26, 1962.
    Barham, Wright & Barham, Ruston, for appellants.
    Brumfield, Turner & Cooper, Robert E. Turner, Baton Rouge, for appellee.
    Before HARDY, AYRES and BOLIN, JJ-
   BOLIN, Judge.

This case was consolidated with No. 9744, entitled Reiley v. Atlas Construction Company, Inc. et al., which was decided by this Court and reported in 146 So.2d 211.

For the reasons stated in No. 9744, it is ordered that this cause be remanded to the Honorable Second Judicial District Court in and for the Parish of Jackson, State of Louisiana, for the limited purpose of the receipt of all legal evidence relative to any compromise or release between this party and any liability insurer of the driver of the vehicle in which she was a guest passenger; and that after, such evidence is received, the case be decided in accordance with law and the views expressed herein. Costs of this appeal are taxed equally against the appellants and appellee and the assessment of all other costs shall await the determination hereof.

Remanded.

AYRES, J.,

dissents for the reasons assigned in Case No. 9744, Reiley v. Atlas Construction Company, Inc. et al., La.App., 146 So.2d 211.

ON REHEARING

HARDY, Judge.

The issues involved in this case have been considered and determined by this court in our opinions on original and rehearing in the consolidated suit of Reiley v. Atlas Construction Company, Inc., et al., 146 So.2d 211.

With reference to the instant suit, it is necessary that we give consideration to the quantum of the award fixed by the judgment appealed from, which was not determined in our original opinion.

The district court rendered judgment in favor of this plaintiff in the principal sum of $35,000.00, which appellants urge is excessive.

Without detailing the full nature, extent and degree of the injuries suffered by this plaintiff, which are established by the record without controversion, we think it is sufficient to set forth the substantial facts. Plaintiff, seventy-three years of age, suffered serious injury consisting principally of comminuted fractures of the distal ends of the femurs in both legs, necessitating extended hospitalization and treatment involving the expenditure of approximately $4,000.00. There can be no question as to the agonizing pain and suffering endured by this plaintiff over a long period of time, nor is there any doubt as to the fact that she will be, in some degree, disabled for the remainder of her life. However, plaintiff has suffered no loss of earnings and, accordingly, her claims for damages are restricted to pain, suffering and disability,, together with medical expenses incurred. In view of this fact, and in further consideration that plaintiff’s normal life expectancy is limited to a period only slightly in excess of seven years, we think the award made is substantially excessive. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is-amended by reducing the amount of the award in favor of plaintiff to the principal sum of Twenty-five Thousand and No/1001 ($25,000.00) Dollars, and as so amended it is affirmed. Costs of the trial court are taxed against defendants-appellants and costs of this appeal against plaintiff-appel-lee.

AYRES, J., dissents.