Case Name: Jose Laciano vs. B. H. Flaspoller
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1883-12
Citations: 35 La. Ann. 1191
Docket Number: No. 8707
Parties: Jose Laciano vs. B. H. Flaspoller.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 1191–1192

Head Matter:
No. 8707.
Jose Laciano vs. B. H. Flaspoller.
A claim of damages for an alleged tort is "barred by the claimant’s consent to and active assistance in the performance of the act whioh produced the damage.
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Tissot, J.
■ H. L, Edwards and J. 8. Adams for Plaintiff and Appellant.
J. -H. Eerguson for Defendant and Appellee.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Manning, J.
This suit is for the recovery of $6,760.00, as damages for taking out of and away from the plaintiff's shop, without warrant of law, a lot of goods which at sale by public auction realized $79.70.
The items of this demand are: *
Actual damages for the loss of goods................$ 800.00
Prospective profits....................... 960.00
Ruined credit...................................... 3,000.00
Exemplary damages............................... 2,000.00
$6,760.00
The claim is preposterous. The lower Judge found that it was unsupported, and gave judgment for the defendant.
The plaintiff had bought a lot of groceries from the defendant, and owed $500 or thereabouts for them. The defendant could get neither pay nor any satisfaction, but promises to pay only, whereupon he proposed to take back his goods or what remained of them. The plaintiff consented to it, and assisted in removing the goods to a dray and float. Whatever might have been his rights to redress for an invasion of his' shop, and amotion of his stock without his consent, he can claim nono where he has not only consented to the defendant's removal of the stock, but actively assisted therein.
Judgment affirmed.
Rehearing refused.