Court Opinion

ID: 9666049
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:03:23.408227+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:23.041424
License: Public Domain

McCALEB, Justice
(concurring).
Although there appears to be some confusion of reasoning in the various opinions of the Courts of.Appeal on the question of law posed for decision in this case, there is unquestionably a direct conflict between the rulings in Hecker v. Betz, La.App., 172 So1. 816, Gonsoulin v. Southern Amusement Company, La.App., 32 So.2d 94 and that of the Court of Appeal in the instant case, on the one hand, and' those of this court in Caldwell v. George Sproull Co., 184 La. 951, 168 So. 112 and Rayburn v. De Moss, 194 La. 175; 193 So. 579, on the other.
The main opinion, I take it, constitutes an approval of the views expressed in the Court of Appeal cases above mentioned and consequently overrules the decisions of this court in the Caldwell and Rayburn cases.
Having endorsed the ruling.in Hecker v. Betz (as a member of the Court of Appeal) and being of the belief that the views expressed therein are correct, I fully subscribe to the opinion herein.