Court Opinion

ID: 9858127
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:15:32.981783+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:53:09.864309
License: Public Domain

HAMITER, Justice
(concurring).
According to the recorded testimony before us it might well be held that only Wilman Gaspard was guilty of negligence that proximately caused this unfortunate accident. His attempted left turn into a private driveway, at a time when a fast moving ve¡hicle was approaching a short distance from his rear, was an exceedingly dangerous maneuver and clearly violative of LRS 32:235. However, the jury and trial judge, who saw and heard the witnesses, found facts from which they concluded that the collision was caused by and resulted from concurrent negligence on the part of the two drivers; and I do not feel justified in contradicting that finding and conclusion, particularly since the writ was granted herein for the purpose of reviewing the Court of Appeal’s ruling on the legal question of imputation of negligence.
In all other -respects I fully agree with the views expressed in the majority opinion.