Accidents

Considering a Lawsuit? Don’t Discard Evidence Critical to Your Case

Published on: April 14, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

detective_crime_scene_dagger-scaled An important safeguard in the law is the requirement for an accusing party to support its allegations with facts and, ultimately, evidence. There are multiple reasons to have this protection in place. Proceeding with a claim that makes a wrong conclusion against another party would not be particularly fair or just, nor would it be an effective use of court resources.

Louisiana courts entitle a party to move for summary judgment to press the opposing side to demonstrate there is a genuine dispute to resolve. La. Code Civ. P art. 966. If, for example, a plaintiff makes a claim that requires the support of physical evidence that they cannot produce, summary judgment will be granted. The following case out of Washington Parish, Louisiana, shows why, if you are considering a lawsuit, you should never discard evidence critical to your case.

Robert D. Byrd used a home-based oxygen machine provided by Pulmonary Care Specialists, Inc. (PCS). He was hospitalized for respiratory failure after being found unconscious by his mother, who reported that the machine was running at the time. Byrd’s machine did not undergo maintenance or repair before the incident. However, his mother did request service one day earlier. Byrd’s mother subsequently set the oxygen machine out with the trash, preventing follow-up testing or inspection.

Louisiana Court holds that tutors are not considered a “parent” entitled to bring a claim for loss of consortium

Published on: April 10, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

child_musical_instruments_1065633-scaled Car accidents are extremely traumatic events that can impact the lives of anyone involved. The legal issues arising after a car accident can be complex and affect everyone involved. For example, what are the rights of a tutor when bringing claims on behalf of the children they are responsible for? Will they be considered “parents” under the law and be allowed to bring a claim for loss of consortium? The following case out of Baton Rouge discusses those issues in relation to a car accident.

Geneva Marie Fils, an infant at the time, suffered severe personal injuries after being in a car accident. After the accident, Geneva’s maternal aunt and tutor, Calverna Reed, filed a lawsuit related to the car accident. In it, she sought damages on behalf of herself and Geneva for their loss of consortium. A loss of consortium claim is brought when someone has been deprived of their family relationship benefits (ex: love and affection) due to injuries caused by the defendant.

The trial court dismissed Reed’s claim for loss of consortium. Afterward, the First Circuit Court of Appeals took the case to determine whether Reed’s loss of consortium claim could stand, considering that she was not a parent or guardian of Fils at the time of the accident.

Fax Filing A Lawsuit, Make Sure You Follow the Rules Precisely

Published on: April 8, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

office_fax_phone_1645312-scaled After a workplace accident, an employee may be flustered, but it is essential that the employee promptly becomes knowledgeable about court requirements and deadlines. If a claim is not filed within an allocated timeline, the claimant may be barred from bringing the claim forward. The following case out of Jefferson Parish shows why, if you’re fax filing a lawsuit, you must follow the rules precisely.

On January 9, 2014, Mr. Palazola fell from a raised platform while in the course and scope of his maintenance job. About a year later, on January 6, 2015, he filed a facsimile petition for damages with the 24th Judicial District Court for Jefferson Parish. On January 23, 2015, the clerk’s office received a copy of Mr. Palazola’s petition with formatting differences from the previously filed facsimile petition.

The defendants, IMC Consulting, Landry Construction, and Cali & LaPlace Engineers, responded by filing an exception of prescription because Mr. Palazola’s facsimile did not meet the requirements outlined in La. R.S. 13:850. According to Louisiana Revised Statute 13:850, facsimile transmission provides that:

Insurance Provider Fails to Cancel Customer’s Coverage after NonPayment, Must Pay Damages

Published on: April 6, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

accident_car_accident_car-scaled Complex insurance issues can add more hassle to the damage from a car accident. What happens if you’re in an automobile accident after failing to pay your insurance premium? Can you still get coverage for your claims? The following case out of Baton Rouge shows why insurance companies must follow proper procedure and offer evidence of cancellation or suffer consequences.

On July 27, 2010, Beverly Smith and Darlene Shelmire were involved in a vehicle collision in Baton Rouge when Shelmire entered an intersection without yielding. Smith sustained injuries due to the accident and filed a claim against Shelmire and her insurer, Gramercy Insurance Company. The insurance company asked the court for summary judgment, claiming that Shelmire did not have insurance coverage at the time of the accident due to the cancellation of her policy for nonpayment. The court held a hearing on the motion and denied it.

The legal entity representing Gramercy Insurance Company, GoAuto, filed a new motion for summary judgment, asserting the same claim that Shelmire’s policy had been canceled before the accident. The trial court again denied this motion. In a bench trial, GoAuto filed a motion for involuntary dismissal, which the court denied. During the trial, the court heard evidence that Shelmire had paid her insurance premium on the afternoon of the accident and reported the accident a few hours later. GoAuto paid Shelmire for the damage to her vehicle the next day, despite their claim at trial that her insurance policy had been canceled by that point. Therefore, the trial ordered GoAuto to pay $15,000 in damages to Smith. GoAuto appealed this judgment.

Damages Awarded by Jury “Shocked the Conscience,” Louisiana Appellate Court Increases Award by $18,500

Published on: April 5, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

money_pay_money_making_0-scaled Although a car accident may result in minor damage to your vehicle, it can cause greater damage to your life. By seeking medical treatments and altering your lifestyle due to accident-related injuries, you deserve to be adequately compensated. The following lawsuit, out of Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, shows how courts deal with damage awards and the request to increase the same.

Gregory Nichols rear-ended Sheila Joseph’s vehicle in 2012. This accident caused Joseph’s pre-existing arthritic spine condition to worsen. As a result, she had to undergo sixteen months of conservative care to manage the pain. A frequent runner before the accident, it also limited her participation in activities she previously enjoyed, such as running 5K races.

Joseph then filed a lawsuit against Nichols, and in 2015, it went to a jury trial. Joseph moved for both a directed verdict related to liability and special damages. The court granted her motion in part, ruling that Nichols was 100% at fault. As to the special damages, the trial court took it under advisement. The jury ultimately awarded Joseph the full amount of her medical expenses ($20,118) as well as general damages ($10,500), specifically $10,000 for pain and suffering and $500 for loss of enjoyment of life.

Choice in Pharmacy For a Work-Related Injury Belongs to the Employer

Published on: April 4, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

pills_medication_tablets_bottle-scaled Getting treatment and medication can be challenging when recovering from an on-the-job injury. If you are injured at work, you may want to pick up prescriptions at the local pharmacy closest to you. While you may have interpreted Louisiana’s Workers’ Compensation statutes to allow for “choice of pharmacy” in the past, the rule is clear. The following case out of the Louisiana Supreme Court shows why the choice in pharmacy for a work-related injury belongs to the employer.

In October 2008, Darvel Burgess sustained an injury while on the job. As a result of that injury, Burgess filled his prescriptions at the pharmacy of his choice. Unfortunately, his employer, the Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans (S&WB), failed to reimburse him for those prescription costs. Therefore, Burgess filed a Disputed Claim for Compensation against S&WB seeking to recover money for medical bills and an outstanding $13,110.02 for Injured Workers Pharmacy (“IWP”) for prescription medications prescribed by his doctor.

S&WB argued it was not responsible for the outstanding prescription medications bill, according to La. R.S. 23:1142(B) because it notified all injured workers of their pharmacy, Covel Caremark Pharmacy. S&WB stated this was the approved provider for prescription services, and if an employee failed to use this provider, they might not pay for prescriptions. S&WB also notified IWP that it was not an approved pharmacy for workers’ compensation purposes.

If You Approach a Barking Dog and It Bites You, is the Owner Liable for your Injuries?

Published on: April 2, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

dog_animal_greyhound_983014-scaled While holding the owner responsible for a dog’s behavior is typically the norm, most reasonable people would know not to approach a barking dog in a gated residence. However, Demetrious Frazier found himself at odds with Luke Difulco after being bitten by one of his dogs while performing his work duties at their home. The following lawsuit answers the question; if you approach a barking dog and it bites you, is the owner liable for your injuries?

Frazier was an employee of the City of Alexandria and worked as a meter reader. He visited the Difulco’s home one afternoon to read their residential meter. As he approached the gate, two dogs began barking, followed by Luke Difulcot’s son, Daniel, who came outside to greet Frazier. Although Daniel offered to kennel the dogs for Frazier’s comfort, he entered through the gate without responding, and the ten-year-old black Labrador bit him on the hand.

In contrast to Daniel’s testimony, Frazier claimed that he saw no evidence of a dog when he approached the Difulco’s residence and entered through the gate to check the meter. After entering the gate, he was attacked by a dog, and then a second one approached him. Frazier received workers’ compensation and medical payments from his employer, and he sought additional damages against Luke Difulco through the lawsuit subject of this appeal.

Carefully Review Lawsuit Releases Before Signing, or Suffer the Consequences

Published on: April 1, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

louisiana_state_coat_arms-scaled While a settlement can be a beneficial way to end a legal dispute, it can have long-lasting implications. If you are considering signing a settlement agreement and release, you must understand the possible effects of entering into such an agreement. A prior settlement agreement and release could result in a dismissal of a future lawsuit you bring against a party on the other side of the settlement agreement. The following lawsuit shows why one should carefully review any settlement agreement before signing. Otherwise, you may suffer harsh consequences.

Steven Richard was involved in a car accident in Concordia Parish, Louisiana. Richard claimed that while driving westbound on U.S. Highway 425, his vehicle was hit by a car Fred Taylor was driving. Richard later sued Taylor, Fred’s Automotive (the shop where Taylor’s vehicle was repaired), and Caitlin Insurance, the insurance company that covered Fred’s Automotive. This article will focus on the claims Richard brought against Taylor, and the next post will focus on the claims Richard brought against Fred’s Automotive and its insurance company.

Taylor filed an exception of res judicata. Under La. R.S. 13:4231, a claim can be dismissed when there was a final and valid prior judgment involving the same parties and the cause(s) of action in the second suit existed at the time of the first judgment and arose out of the same occurrence as the first action. Taylor argued that the lawsuit against him should be dismissed under the doctrine of res judicata because Richard had previously signed a release with him. Taylor introduced into evidence a document titled “Release of All Claims” that Richard had previously signed. The trial court dismissed the claim against Taylor, holding the res judicata applied. Richard appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in finding that res judicata applied.

Evidence of Knowledge Required to Prevail in Louisiana Slip-and-Fall Lawsuits

Published on: March 31, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

dollar_general_store_in-scaled If you slip and fall over an item that has fallen at a store, you might think that you will be able to recover for your injuries in a lawsuit against the store. However, it is not enough to simply show that you slipped and fell. Instead, you must show that the store knew about or created the condition that caused you to slip and fall. Because Lilly Edwards could not show this, the court dismissed her lawsuit against a Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Dollar General store.

While shopping at a Dollar General store in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Edwards tripped on a box that she later described as a poster board. She claimed this poster board fell into the aisle where she was shopping. Edwards claimed she tripped on it as she went around the corner, which caused her to fall and injure her knee. After this fall, Edwards sued the Dollar General store. Dollar General filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. The trial court held that Edwards could not prove that Dollar General had known about the hazardous condition that resulted in her fall. Without this knowledge, Dollar General could not be found liable. Edwards then appealed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal.

Summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence shows no genuine issues of material fact. See La. C.C.P. art 966(B)(2). Under Louisiana law, a store owner such as Dollar General owes a duty to people who come to shop there to exercise reasonable care to ensure its floors are kept in a reasonably safe condition and that the store has no hazardous conditions. See La. R.S. 9:2800.6. Here, Edwards had the burden of proving: (1) the poster board that she tripped over was an unreasonable risk of harm; (2) Dollar General had either created or had knowledge of the poster board on the floor; and (3) Dollar General did not exercise a reasonable standard of care.

Who is Liable for Injuries for a Slip and Fall on a Public Sidewalk?

Published on: March 30, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

foggy_sidewalk_morning_fog-scaled Premises liability is an active area of personal injury law, and accidents occurring on public property are no exception. The question often arises, who is liable for a slip and fall on a public sidewalk? In this case, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal was asked to determine the premises liability of the town of Lake Arthur for a fall occurring on a public sidewalk built and maintained by this public entity.

On July 11, 2014, Robin Rogers Richard fell while walking along a sidewalk in Lake Arthur. The portion of the sidewalk where her fall occurred was a driveway that allowed maintenance vehicles to access a public park, with a sloping transition on either side running perpendicular to the street. This portion of the sidewalk was completed in September 2013 by John Anderson Concrete Finishes, Inc. (Anderson), under the direction of Robert Bertrand, the major of Lake Arthur.

Ms. Richard filed a motion for summary judgment on the liability issue, arguing the slope of the transition area did not meet certain state and national requirements and was, therefore, defective per se. However, at her deposition, she indicated that her last step before her fall was on a flat portion of the new sidewalk, not the sloped portion. In response, Lake Arthur, Anderson, and its insurer, Seneca Specialty Insurance Co, filed motions for summary judgment alleging statutory immunity from liability and they were not liable because the condition of the sidewalk was open and obvious.