Negligence Claims

Dealing with Flood Damaged Property? Be Prepared to Show Causation

Published on: July 15, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

flood_fields_pasture_trees-scaled The story of an underdog seeking justice against a powerful corporation is a familiar legal narrative. And while we may be inclined to root for the little guy, that does not relieve him from proving he has a valid case.

In Louisiana, a plaintiff will not see his case go to trial if it lacks support to overcome a motion for summary judgment. The opposing side will look for holes in the plaintiff’s claim, posing the question: if you have not produced facts suggesting I committed this offense, how will you obtain the requisite evidence to prove it at trial? Accordingly, every “essential element” of a claim requires factual support to serve as a basis for deliberation at trial. La. C.C.P. art 996(c)(2).

The Mitchells, owners of a Shapes Gym in the Parish of Ascension, faced this “make it or break it” moment of summary judgment in their case against neighboring businesses, Wal-Mart, and Aaron’s. The Mitchells alleged that the neighbors’ improperly designed and maintained stormwater drainage systems were to blame for six inches of rainwater that flooded the gym in 2009 and again during litigation of the first flood claim in 2014.

Understanding Open and Obvious Defects: Implications for Personal Injury Claims

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

sidewalk_texture_background_1089989-scaled When it comes to personal injury claims resulting from slips, trips, or falls, the concept of open and obvious defects plays a significant role. Failing to act reasonably or being harmed by an apparent defect may hinder your ability to recover compensation for your injuries. This case exemplifies the importance of these factors in determining liability.

Ray Eskine was a permanently disabled individual who used a walker to move around. When trying to see how long the grass was on his lot across the street, he walked across an elevated walkway in front of his house. One of the wheels on his walker slipped, causing him to fall into a ditch and get injured.

Eskine and his wife filed a lawsuit against the City of Gretna and its insurer, claiming the walkway was defective and presented an unreasonably dangerous condition. They claimed the City of Gretna was responsible for the care of the walkway and had knowledge of the defective condition that resulted in his injury.

Supermarket Not Liable For Slip-and-Fall Because Of Lack Of Constructive Notice

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

accident_injury_risk_banana_0-scaled When you make a quick run to the store, the last thing you expect is to be injured while shopping. If you slip and fall at a store, you might expect the store to be responsible for any injuries you might have suffered. However, Louisiana law requires that a store have actual or constructive knowledge of the hazardous condition to be held liable. Therefore, if you are considering filing a lawsuit against a store for a slip-and-fall accident, it is essential to provide evidence of the store’s knowledge so your claim does not get dismissed.

Quentella Batiste was shopping with her granddaughter at Vernon’s Supermarket in Lutcher, Louisiana. Batiste slipped and fell in a puddle of water in the beer and beverage aisle as she was headed to check out at the front of the store. She injured her shoulder, which required surgery. Batiste and her husband filed a lawsuit against Vernon’s Supermarket and its insurer.

Vernon’s Supermarket filed a summary judgment motion, arguing the Batistes could not prove Vernon’s Supermarket created or actual or constructive knowledge of the hazardous condition of the purported water on the floor, as required under the Louisiana Merchant Liability Statute, La. R.S. 9:2800.6. Vernon’s Supermarket provided deposition testimony where Baptiste said she did not know where the substance she slipped on came from, how long it had been there, or whether anyone at the store knew the substance was present before she fell. They also provided surveillance footage and testimony from several employees to support Vernon Supermarket’s claim no one knew about the substance before Batiste’s fall.

No Legal Malpractice Where Underlying Medical Malpractice Claim Was Meritless

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

hammer_court_judge_justice_3-scaled When considering a legal malpractice claim, it is crucial to understand that proving your attorneys’ negligence alone is insufficient. To establish the merit of such a claim, you must demonstrate an underlying loss resulting from their negligence. This requires presenting compelling evidence that your original claim would have been successful had your attorneys not been negligent. The case of Shawn Cupit, who pursued a wrongful death lawsuit, highlights the significance of providing admissible evidence and the challenges involved in proving a legal malpractice case.

Shawn Cupit hired Joseph Moffett, a lawyer in Mississippi, to represent him in a wrongful death lawsuit involving the death of his mother. His mother had been a patient at a rehabilitation hospital in Concordia Parish, Louisiana, because of injuries related to a burned foot. One night, she climbed out a window at the rehabilitation hospital and was hit and killed by a drunk driver. They filed a lawsuit against the drunk driver, his insurer, and the rehabilitation hospital. They claimed the rehabilitation hospital had been negligent in observing their patient and did not provide a safe prejudice.

Moffett retained Roger Burgess and Baggett McCall as local counsel in Louisiana. Burgess submitted a request for a Medical Review Panel under La. R.S. 40:1231.8. The Medical Review Panel found the rehabilitation hospital had not failed to comply with the required standard of care. Burgess and McCall also retained expert witnesses, but the expert’s medical opinion letter concluded there was no evidence of the rehabilitation hospital committing medical malpractice.

A Slippery Case: How a Lease Agreement Swayed a Personal Injury Lawsuit Against a Medical Facility

Published on: June 28, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

slip_up_danger_careless-scaled Imagine attending a routine medical appointment at your local doctor’s office. You enter the premises expecting a standard check-up, but unexpectedly, you trip over a defective threshold and fall onto a hard terrazzo floor. This unsettling scenario is precisely what Lois J. Tate encountered in their accident, sparking a personal injury action against Touro Infirmary and Louisiana Children’s Medical Center. The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the Trial Court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of the defendants, Touro Infirmary, and Louisiana Children’s Medical Center.

In a life-altering event, Tate tripped over what she claimed to be a defective threshold at the office of Dr. Shelton Barnes. The office was located in a building leased from Touro Infirmary. This unexpected fall led to injuries, which prompted Tate to file a lawsuit for damages based on negligence and strict liability against the defendants, including Touro Infirmary, Louisiana Children’s Medical Center, and Dr. Shelton Barnes. Tate’s claim encountered a significant challenge when the Trial Court granted summary judgment favoring the defendants. Tate could not prove a crucial element of her claim—Touro’s knowledge of the alleged defect. Undeterred, Tate appealed the decision.

Under Louisiana law, a summary judgment is applied when there’s no genuine dispute regarding a critical fact that could influence the relief a litigant seeks. To successfully contest a summary judgment, a plaintiff cannot only rely on allegations or speculation. They must present substantial proof of a genuine issue of material fact. For Tate, this involved demonstrating Touro’s awareness of the defect. Simon v. Hillensbeck.

Pre-Trial Notice Did Not Waive Party’s Right to Jury Trial

Published on: June 25, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

courthouse_court_law_justice_0-scaled If you are involved with a lawsuit, you probably imagine your day in court involving a jury listening to the evidence and rendering a decision. After all, the US Constitution protects our right to a trial by jury. But what happens if the court issues a notice scheduling your trial to be heard in front of a judge instead of a jury?

Leigh Ann Schell and McGready Richeson (“Plaintiffs”) filed a lawsuit against Kuchler Polk Weiner LLC (“Kuchler”). Kuchler filed an answer and included a jury demand. Kuchler also paid the applicable filing fee. The trial court then held a pre-trial conference where it selected a trial date. At the conference, both parties’ attorneys and the trial judge signed a pre-trial notice that included the trial date for a trial to be held in front of a judge.

Later, Kuchler’s attorneys noticed the alleged error of setting the trial before a judge, not a jury. Kuchler filed a Motion to Continue, arguing it had not waived its right to a jury trial and had not authorized its attorneys to waive that right on its behalf. As evidence, Kuchler introduced an affidavit from its managing partner and authorized representative stating Kuchler had never authorized anyone to waive its right to a trial by jury. The trial court denied the motion, and Kuchler appealed.

Legal Boundaries and the Scope of Employment: Vicarious Liability Challenges in Car Wreck Cases

Published on: June 23, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

us_navy_120117_n_17-scaled In the aftermath of a vehicle collision, the impact reverberates beyond the immediate parties involved, leaving a trail of injuries and legal complexities. Such was the case for Cody Johnson, a passenger on an RTA bus when it collided with another vehicle. Seeking full compensation for her damages, she pursued a vicarious liability claim against the driver’s employer. However, the court’s assessment of the driver’s scope of employment would determine the outcome of her pursuit of justice.

At 6:00 am, one hour before he was scheduled to be on call, Mr. Molbert was summoned into work by his boss. Molbert worked for Anesthesia Consultants of the South, LLC, and that morning ACS needed Molbert to help perform an appendectomy. At 6:30 am, 15 minutes sooner than usual, Molbert collided with an RTA bus on the way to the hospital. Ms. Johnson, a passenger on the bus, sued Molbert, ACS, and RTA to recover damages for her injuries.

ACS filed for a directed verdict, arguing that Molbert was not within his scope of employment at the time of the accident. This kind of argument is typically referred to as a vicarious liability argument. The trial court granted the motion, finding that ACS was not liable as an employer because Molbert was commuting to work at the time of the accident. The trial court relied on the seven Mclin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors, Inc. factors to make this determination.

Hurricane Katrina Victim Finds Favor in the Louisiana Courts

Published on: June 22, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

hurricane_katrina_flooding_180538-scaled Hurricanes do not discriminate. Regardless of age, wealth, gender, health, or race, hurricanes are merciless to all they come in contact with. Such was the case for Ms. Taylor, who experienced the wrath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

Ms. Taylor had been in the care of Touro Infirmary when Hurricane Katrina struck the state of Louisiana in 2005. Taylor was 82 and had undergone radiation therapy for her lung cancer three days before Hurricane Katrina’s landfall. After radiation, Taylor complained of nausea and vomiting. Staff diagnosed her with hematemesis, nausea, vomiting, dehydration, digoxin toxicity, COPD, and lung cancer.

When Hurricane Katrina struck, the City of New Orleans experienced severe infrastructure damage, expansive power outages, and a lack of clean water. Touro also experienced generator failure, causing the building to become unbearably hot. After 72 hours, it evacuated its patients to UT Southwestern Hospital in Dallas, TX. When the patients arrived, medical staff struggled to care for them because pieces of their medical charts were missing.

Can a Witness to an Accident Seek Damages in Court?

Published on: June 21, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

airplane_airplane_cruising_897048-scaled Have you ever witnessed an accident? The experience can be overwhelming, leaving lasting, often overlooked emotional scars. Such consequences raise an essential question; can a witness to an accident seek damages in court? The subsequent lawsuit helps answer that question. The journey of the litigants through the intricate legal landscape reveals their unwavering determination to find solace for the emotional anguish they endured as witnesses to the tragic events.

The story begins on a fateful day when Briana Davis and her boyfriend, Reginald Hilliard, Jr., embarked on an aerial tour of the City of New Orleans. Unfortunately, the flight ended tragically as the plane, piloted by James Biondo, crashed into Lake Pontchartrain, resulting in the death of Reginald Hilliard, Jr. In the aftermath, Dorothy Jarvis, Tukeya Jarvis, and Thomas Hilliard (Jarvis and Hillard), relatives of the deceased, arrived at the crash scene and witnessed the recovery operations.

In their lawsuit, Jarvis and Hillard claimed that James Biondo’s negligence, specifically his failure to properly inspect, operate, pilot, navigate, and prevent the airplane crash, was the direct cause of the tragedy. Furthermore, they sought bystander damages under Louisiana C.C. art. 2315.6, asserting they suffered severe mental anguish and emotional distress due to witnessing the crash and its aftermath.

Procedural Pitfalls: The Consequences of Neglecting Administrative Remedies in Personal Injury Claims

Published on: June 20, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

jail_bars_old_history A personal injury claim requires following specific rules and procedures to ensure a fair and just resolution. For Joseph Barlow, who slipped and fell while detained at the Lafayette Correctional Facility, his failure to adhere to the correction center’s administrative remedies became critical. This article examines the consequences Barlow faced when he disregarded the proper procedures and highlights the significance of following the established protocols.

Joseph Barlow was detained at the Lafayette Correctional Facility, where he slipped and fell in a puddle of water on two different occasions. Barlow claims an open pipe allowed water to overflow onto the floor. He filed a lawsuit against the Director of Corrections for Lafayette Parish, the Sheriff of Lafayette Parish, and the insurance company for injuries sustained to his neck and back. The defendants filed an exception of prematurity, claiming Barlow did not look at all of the remedies provided by the correction center’s handbook. The defendants also filed an exception of prescription and abandonment. A trial court sustained all of the defendants’ motions, and Barlow’s claims were dismissed. Barlow appealed.

In the appeal, Barlow claimed the trial court erred in granting the exception of prematurity. He first argued the handbook did not mention the procedures for injury claims resulting from negligence. He then argued the defendants had notice of the danger from the pipe. Lastly, Barlow claimed he did not receive an up-to-date handbook and was not informed of its alterations.