Plaintiff, Mrs. Edith K. Donovan, brought suit against Barber Brothers Contracting Company, Inc., and its insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, for damages sustained by her on November 11,
Plaintiff has appealed from this judgment alleging error by the trial court in finding her guilty of contributory negligence under the facts of the case, and also in not applying the so-called doctrine of "momentary forgetfulness."
The record reveals that on the day of the accident the sixty-eight year old Mrs. Donovan, who lived on Jackson Avenue, approximately a block and one-half from the excavation site had gone to mail a letter to her mother. Although there was a paved sidewalk on the other side of the street, plaintiff had followed an unpaved foot path along the western side of Acadian Throughway northbound, she stepped into the street as she reached the intersection of Fairfields and Acadian Throughway in order to avoid stepping into the hole excavated by Barber Brothers, which, on one side, was approximately 12 to 18 inches from the curb of the street. Plaintiff crossed Fairfields Avenue, mailed her letter, and was returning home by the same route when she thought she heard an automobile behind her. She stepped up off the street onto the curb; In so doing she stepped on a clod of some loose ground, lost her balance and fell in the hole breaking her arm.
In concluding that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent, and that her negligence barred her recovery, the trial judge set forth the following reasons with which we concur:
The plaintiff has urged error by this court in not considering "momentary forgetfulness." If this court has the responsibility in the past of grafting onto the body of the law of Louisiana the nebulous concept of "momentary forgetfulness," it wishes to state at this time that the concept is extremely limited in its nature and scope, and has no application whatsoever to the facts of this case. Plaintiff did not forget the location of the excavation into which she fell. She repeatedly affirmed that she knew it existed; she simply miscalculated her own movements and slipped into it, and "whether it was the dampness of the ground from the dew or whether the loose gravel was there," she could not speculate.
In view of our holding it is unnecessary to consider the question with reference to whether or not the defendant contracting company was negligent in failing to provide barricades around the subject excavation or other devices to warn the public,
Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed at appellant's cost.