Snow-Sorapuru v. Greyhound Lines, Inc ( 2002 )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 02-30071
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
FLORETTA SNOW-SORAPURU,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GREYHOUND LINES INC., and (Its Insurer); UNIDENTIFIED
PARTY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Louisiana
No. 00-CV-3553-F
October 28, 2002
Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff Floretta Snow-Sorapuru appeals the district court’s dismissal of her personal injury
suit against defendant Greyhound Lines, Inc. under Rule 52(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Procedure. Snow-Sorapuru contends that the district court, applying Louisiana law in this diversity
action, erred in finding that her failure to look where she was sitting was the sole cause of her alleged
injury from a bro ken armrest on one of the defendant’s buses. Where a district court has entered
judgment after hearing all the evidence on a crucial issue of fact pursuant to Rule 52(c), its findings
of fact are reviewed only for clear error while its conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
Samson v. Apollo Res., Inc., 242 F.3d 629, 632-33 (5th Cir. 2001). The only evidence presented on
the issue of causation was the testimony of the plaintiff, who stated that she sat down without
looking. Because the district court’s findings were not clearly erroneous, we affirm. See Ryland v.
Liberty Lloyd’s Ins. Co., 630 So.2d 1289, 1302 (La. 1994) (“Negligence is only actionable where it
is both a cause in fact and a legal cause of the injury.”); Johnson v. Lull Enters., Inc., 663 So.2d 403,
409 (La. Ct. App. 1995) (“Even in a case where some negligence exists, without causation no liability
is created and the negligence is not actionable.”).
AFFIRMED.
-2-