Case Name: LEO v. TEXAS & PAC. RY. CO.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1903-02-16
Citations: 110 La. 213
Docket Number: No. 14,533
Parties: LEO v. TEXAS & PAC. RY. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 214–214

Head Matter:
(34 South. 417.)
No. 14,533.
LEO v. TEXAS & PAC. RY. CO.
(Feb. 16, 1903.)
RAILROADS — DEFECTIVE CROSSING — NEGLIGENCE — EVIDENCE.
1. In view of the facts which the court finds established by the evidence in the record, the defendant is in no wise responsible for the injury of which the plaintiff complains.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; John St. Paul, Judge.
Action by S. M. Leo against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals*
Affirmed.
William Stirling Parkerson, for appellant. Howe, Spencer & Cocke, for appellee.
Rehearing denied May 11, 1903.

Opinion:
MONROE, J.
The plaintiff sues for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by reason of the giving way of a box drain across the public road in the parish of 'Jefferson, whereby one of his feet went through, and his knee cap was broken. He alleges that the drain in question was put in by defendant for its own purposes; that the property on either side of the road belonged to the defendant; and that it (the defendant) was bound to keep the drain in order, but that it failed to do so, and the drain was in a dangerous condition, to the knowledge of the defendant; and that he (plaintiff) could not have avoided the accident, etc.
The answer is a general denial.
There was judgment in the district court in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff has appealed.
The facts, as we find them from the evidence in the .record, are that the plaintiff, having crossed the river at the Walnut street ferry, was driving a wagon containing plumber's tools and wares in the direction of defendant's railway, and had about reached the end of the ramp or incline leading from the ferry, when his horse stumbled or shied, and he was thrown to the ground, thereby sustaining the injury of which he complains — a misfortune for which the defendant is in nowise responsible. Whether the defendant would be liable if the facts were as stated in the petition need not be determined.
Judgment affirmed.