Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

287 F.2d 388

Docket No. 18622.

Jupiter v. United States

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Feb. 24, 1961.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1961-02-24

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 1969

4 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Jupiter v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1961-02-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*389Julian B. Humphrey, David C. Treen, New Orleans, La., for appellant.

¶2Francis G. Weller, Asst. U. S. Atty., New Orleans, La., M. Hepburn Many, U. S. Atty., New Orleans, La., for appel-lee.

¶3Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, BROWN, Circuit Judge, and CLAYTON, District Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5This appeal in a federal tort claims action presents only issues of fact. The record discloses that there was ample evidence to support the finding of the trial court that the appellant Jupiter was guilty of contributory negligence and that such contributory negligence continued to the occurrence of the mishap which produced the injury from which he suffered. See Jupiter v. United States, D.C., 181 F.Supp. 294.

¶6Although the strict application of the contributory negligence doctrine works a hardship on tort claim litigants in Alabama in contrast to other states where the rule of comparative negligence applies, we are bound to apply the law of the pláce of injury in such a case.

¶7The judgment must be affirmed.

/287/f2d/388 · .json · Public domain