Case Name: Mary DeCLOUET v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE INC.
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1983-03-04
Citations: 434 So. 2d 130
Docket Number: No. CA-0089
Parties: Mary DeCLOUET v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE INC.
Judges: Before GULOTTA, BARRY, BYRNES and WARD, JJ., and SWIFT, J. Pro Tern.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 434
Pages: 130–133

Head Matter:
Mary DeCLOUET v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE INC.
No. CA-0089.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
March 4, 1983.
Rehearing Denied July 26, 1983.
James Maher, III, New Orleans Public Service, Inc., New Orleans, for appellant.
Darleen M. Jacobs (A Professional Law Corp.), New Orleans, for appellee.
Before GULOTTA, BARRY, BYRNES and WARD, JJ., and SWIFT, J. Pro Tern.

Opinion:
BYRNES, Judge.
New Orleans Public Service, Inc. (NOP-SI) appeals from a judgment for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff when she slipped and fell on a NOPSI bus. Plaintiff was awarded damages in the amount of two thousand one hundred and thirty dollars ($2,130.00) Liability only is at issue.
According to Mary DeClouet, on the rainy afternoon of May 13, 1979, she fell in a puddle of water in the aisle of the bus as she walked toward a seat. Plaintiff claims the puddle was approximately eight inches in diameter. The only other passenger on the bus did not testify.
NOPSI contends in this appeal the evidence did not establish that there were puddles of water requiring mopping or that the floor was unusually wet requiring a warning to the passengers. Furthermore, NOP-SI claims plaintiffs recovery is barred by contributory negligence.
The trial judge stated in written reasons "... the evidence is clear that there was water in the aisle of the bus from the front door to an area beyond the third seat of the bus." He then concluded the bus driver had a duty to remove the water or warn his passengers of the potential hazard and failed to do so.
Well settled is the rule that a common carrier is not an insurer of the safety of its fare-paying passengers. Nonetheless, the carrier is required to exercise the highest degree of care, and the showing of injury to a fare-paying passenger establishes a prima facie case of negligence imposing the burden on the carrier to exculpate itself.
On the day of the accident, it had been raining. Plaintiff and her daughter testified there were puddles of water on the bus floor. The bus driver stated that he had inspected the bus at the end of the run before plaintiff's accident, and had observed that the rubberized, grooved floor was not unusually wet. Further a NOPSI chief supervisor claimed immediately after the accident he had not observed any "abnormal" wetness on the floor. Both the bus driver and the supervisor testified the bus windows were shut and attributed the wetness to passengers' tracking and dripping water on the floor on a rainy day.
The trial judge did not specifically find, in his written reasons, that there were indeed puddles on the bus floor. He did conclude, however, that there existed such an accumulation of water (if not puddles) to require the bus floor be mopped or the passengers be warned. We cannot say, based on credibility, the trial judge erred.
NOPSI further contends that plaintiff is barred from recovery because of her contributory negligence in that she should have known the bus floor was wet and therefore should have held on to the rail provided. We disagree. In Sanders v. New Orleans Public Service Inc., 422 So.2d 232 (La.App. 4th Cir.1972) a similar circumstance presented itself. In Sanders, the plaintiff was injured when the bus in which she was riding made a sudden and jerking stop causing plaintiff to fall. The bus had been making these jerky stops for three or four stops prior to plaintiff's own stop. Plaintiff arose from her seat and made her way to the front of the bus to disembark before the bus came to a complete stop. The trial judge held, with this court affirming, that plaintiff was not contributorily negligent in leaving her seat before the bus had come to a complete stop. In determining whether or not plaintiff was contributorily negligent the court stated:
"Contributory negligence is objectively determined under the reasonable man standard. McInnis v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., 322 So.2d 155 (La.1975). The victim is required only to use reasonable precautions, and his conduct in this regard is not negligent if, by the commonsense test, the conduct is in accord with that of reasonably prudent persons faced with similar conditions and circumstances. Dupas v. City of New Orleans, 354 So.2d 1311 (La.1978)."
NOPSI would have this court believe that plaintiff was contributorily negligent because she chose a seat in the rear of the bus, causing her to walk through the water in the aisle. To put such restrictive standards on the behavior of this plaintiff would in effect severely erode the past jurisprudence pertaining to common carrier liability. Under the approach ennunciated by this court in Sanders, we do not accept NOPSI contention that this fifty-eight year old plaintiff in any way contributed to this accident.
The judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed. All costs of this appeal are to be borne by the appellant.
AFFIRMED.
BARRY, J., concurs.
GULOTTA, J., and G. WILLIAM SWIFT, Jr., J. Pro Tern., dissent.
. See Carter v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 305 So.2d 481 (La.1975); Wise v. Prescott, 244 La. 157, 151 So.2d 356 (La.1963); Trask v. New Orleans Public Service Inc., 422 So.2d 1285 (La.App. 4th Cir.1982); Skidmore v. New Orleans Public Service Inc., 311 So.2d 511 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1975); Schenker v. Randle, 209 So.2d 327 (La.App. 4th Cir.1968).