Published on: | By

extrication_accident_rescue_421161-scaledWhat happens if you were previously injured in an incident and later involved in another accident that causes further injury? Can the person responsible for the second injury be liable for your injuries? Although pre-existing injuries can make it more complicated to determine the scope of your injuries, the court will still consider the extent to which the second accident caused additional injuries and affected your life.

Shermain Montiel Vaughn was driving a truck for Oakley Trucking, his employer. Vaughn hit the front of Jenella Ben’s car while attempting to turn left on a street in Lafayette, Louisiana. At the time of the accident, Rickie Hairston was riding in Ben’s car. Vaughn was 100% at fault for the accident and was in the scope and course of his job with Oakley Trucking when the accident occurred. Hairston filed a lawsuit, and the trial court ruled in his favor. The trial court awarded him $195,000 for general damages and $60,683 for special damages, including $240 of lost wages. Vaughn filed an appeal based partly on the assertion Hairston’s credibility was suspect given his prior injury and the facts surrounding which accident caused the injuries he complained of. 

Vaughn argued the trial court erred in not discrediting Hairston’s testimony after he was impeached at trial. He claimed Hairston hurt his knee from an incident unrelated to the car accident. He also argued Hairston was not credible because he acknowledged he did not tell his doctors about his prior injury. However, an appellate court defers to the trial court’s credibility determination because it is better positioned as it can examine a witness’s demeanor and the nuances of their testimony. See Lopez v. Lopez. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

hospital_nurse_patient_child-scaledWhen pursuing a legal claim against an employer regarding adverse employment actions, it is crucial to grasp the necessary elements required for a successful case. Failure to establish all essential components can result in the dismissal of your claim. The following lawsuit examines the circumstances of Lori Rayborn, a nurse at a high school in Bossier Parish, who faced alleged retaliation after expressing concerns about the administration’s handling of a student’s health needs. Despite her efforts to seek legal redress, Rayborn’s claims were ultimately dismissed.

Rayborn worked as a nurse at a High School in the School System in Bossier Parish.  A diabetic student at the school, RNM, committed suicide due to her classmates’ bullying. Rayborn said she had recommended RNM receive special accommodation, but the student said she did not want to be profiled in the yearbook as having a disability. About a week before RNM’s death, Rayborn treated the student for high glucose levels. 

After RNM’s death, the parents filed a lawsuit against the Bossier Parish School Board. As part of the lawsuit, Rayborn’s notes related to her treatment of RNM were subpoenaed. Rayborn’s supervisors met with her to talk about the notes. Rayborn expressed concerns about how the school dealt with RNM’s health needs. Rayborn claimed after the meeting, her bosses treated her differently. There were later medical incidents at the school Rayborn was not informed about until after 911 was called. Rayborn was subsequently transferred to another school. She filed two grievances, but the Board took no action. Rayborn eventually resigned. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

church_interior_0-scaledWe have all heard that “good fences make good neighbors.”  But what happens when there is a dispute about the boundary of two pieces of property? The following conflict between New Fellowship Baptist Church and the Beals, who found themselves at odds over the boundary of their adjoining properties, helps answer this question. The dispute raises questions about the concept of acquisitive prescription, the importance of possession, and the determination of boundaries. By carefully examining the trial and appellate court’s rulings, we gain insights into the legal principles and the significance of seeking professional advice in property-related conflicts.

New Fellowship Baptist Church, located in Delhi, Louisiana, was established in 1919. Florenda and Kathy Beals purchased property located adjacent to the church. The Beals sent the church a notice of trespass warning and told the church it needed to remove its structures and other movable items on its property. 

Under La. C.C. art. 3486, a person can acquire property, even without title or possession in good faith, by prescription of 30 years.  At trial, multiple witnesses had testified that New Fellowship had had a choir stand in the location for at least 30 years. Other witnesses testified about maintenance services the church had provided and New Fellowship’s indoor plumbing. The trial court ruled in favor of New Fellowship and dismissed the Beals’ trespass claims. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

insurance_damage_repair_checklist-scaledThe process of filing insurance claims can be time-consuming, demanding careful attention from all parties involved. In a recent ruling by the First Circuit Court of Appeal in Louisiana, the importance of timely and exhaustive pursuit of administrative remedies before seeking judicial review in insurance payment disputes was underscored. The case of Southern Framers of Louisiana, LLC (Southern Framers) sheds light on the consequences of premature legal action, emphasizing the need to explore alternative avenues, such as administrative proceedings, before resorting to the courts. Through an examination of Southern Framers’ dispute with a healthcare provider, this ruling serves as a valuable reminder for future litigants to exhaust administrative remedies diligently and consider the proper timing and procedures in pursuing legal recourse.

After Rafael Diaz (Mr. Diaz) injured his shoulder during the scope of his employment with Southern Framers, he underwent rotator cuff surgery which Dr. Richard Texada performed at Doctor’s Hospital of Slidell d/b/a Sterling Surgical Hospital (Hospital). Following Mr. Diaz’s surgery, the Hospital sent a bill for $33,133.41 to Southern Framers’ insurance carrier Louisiana Homebuilders Association-Self Insured Fund (Carrier). On behalf of Southern Framers, the Carrier paid $8,887.80 to the Hospital, indicating what they believed was a “reasonable reimbursement for services” in Mr. Diaz’s surgery. As a result, the Hospital filed an administrative review according to their rights within Louisiana Administrative Code Title 40, pt. I, § 5149 (Title 40), for this underpayment of the Hospital’s services.

Neither Southern Framers nor the Carrier responded to the administrative review. Instead, they filed a “Disputed Claim for Compensation” with the Office of Workers’ Compensation (OWC), stating that the unpaid portion of the original $33,133.41 bill was unreasonable. Southern Framers took this claim further, alleging that even the $8,887.80 previously paid to the Hospital by the Carrier was an overpayment and demanded reimbursement. The Hospital responded to the OWC complaint, raising multiple objections, including prematurity, and disputing the claims for reimbursement. At the hearing, the OWC judge sustained the Hospital’s prematurity objection, finding that Southern Framers and the Carrier failed to follow the administrative remedies of Title 40. The OWC judge called this claim “an attempt to circumvent the procedure that’s supposed to streamline and make the payments go quicker and faster without going through the hearing process.”

Continue reading

Published on: | By

prison_cell_slammer_prison-scaledIn a society built upon the principles of justice and fairness, few experiences can be as devastating as being wrongfully accused of a crime, subsequently arrested, and imprisoned for a wrongdoing one did not commit. The ramifications of such a traumatic ordeal can be profound, leaving individuals grappling with profound emotional, psychological, and even physical consequences. In the face of such injustice, victims must be allowed to seek justice and hold accountable those responsible for their unwarranted suffering. 

This article delves into the harrowing reality of false arrest and wrongful imprisonment, highlighting the importance of legal recourse and the pivotal role of experienced attorneys in navigating the complex legal landscape to secure redress and restore the shattered lives of the innocent.

On May 4, 2015, Marlon Eaglin and Paul Powell were falsely accused of participating in an alleged shooting by two other suspects and were then arrested on attempted murder charges. The two were held in prison until August 21, 2015. On April 29, 2016, Eaglin filed a lawsuit seeking damages against the Eunice Police Department, the Chief of Police, Chief Randy Fontenot, and the City of Eunice, claiming he was falsely arrested and imprisoned by Eunice Police.

Continue reading

Published on: | By

oil_oil_production_oil-scaledSafeguarding your property rights is of utmost importance, as the consequences of inadequate protection can be far-reaching. While oil and gas rights disputes may not directly affect the average citizen, other property-related conflicts can significantly impact individuals and their assets. In such complex situations, navigating the intricacies of property laws requires the expertise of an experienced attorney who can empower you with a clear understanding of your rights, ensure the legal protections you are entitled to, and advocate on your behalf. The following lawsuit shows the importance of expert counsel in understanding your property rights. 

In 2011, a dispute arose over a large drilling unit’s oil and gas rights. Chesapeake Operating (“Chesapeake”) was the unit’s appointed operator and a lessee of mineral interests for a portion of the unit. TDX Energy (“TDX”) was also a lessee for a part of the unit. The unit’s drilling began in February 2011 and ended in July 2011. TDX’s leases to its oil and gas interests had not been recorded until after the drilling had been completed in September 2011. 

Later in 2011, TDX made Chesapeake aware of its leases and requested accounting reports, as required under Louisiana’s Title 30, section 103.1. After six weeks, having yet to receive a response, TDX again notified Chesapeake of how it had failed to comply with the law. Chesapeake eventually responded with a letter to TDX, requesting TDX decide whether it would participate in the unit well’s risk under section 10(A) of the statute. TDX responded by disagreeing, stating it was not required by law to opt-in or out and that Chesapeake did not provide the accounting reports; it forfeited its rights to contribution to drilling costs.

Continue reading

Published on: | By

tractor_red_tractor_red-scaledWhen an item is repaired, it is reasonable to expect it to be safe and free of defects upon its return. However, when an injury occurs after a product’s repair, the injured party is entitled to seek damages. For example, Joe McPherson suffered a knee injury after the battery compartment of a tractor, which Ronald Dauzat repaired, fell apart. The question of negligence and responsibility arose, leading to a legal dispute and subsequent appeal.

Dauzat sold his old tractor to McPherson. However, it did not function properly, so Dauzat took it in for repairs. Dauzat notified McPherson the tractor was ready to be picked up. When McPherson arrived at the shop, Dauzat was not there. But two men he assumed were employees permitted him to mount and inspect the tractor. When McPherson tried to demount, the battery compartment fell apart, and he fell and wounded his knee

McPherson filed a lawsuit against Dauzat for his injury. His complaint alleged the defective tractor caused his injuries. He stated that his injury would have been prevented if the battery box had been firmly latched. Dauzat filed an involuntary dismissal and claimed McPherson failed to present evidence that the unlatched box was the cause of his fall. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

truth_newspaper_news_printed-scaledHonesty is always the best policy. This proverb rings especially true in the legal system, where truthfulness and transparency are vital to maintaining the legal process. Failure to tell the truth or even a mistake in remembering the facts can bring severe consequences, as Mark and Paulette Moore discovered after a car accident on Interstate 10 in Iberville Parish.

Russell Charles was driving his vehicle and pulling a flatbed trailer when a pick-up driven by Mark Moore suddenly rear-ended him. The pick-up was the property of Moore Leasing LLC, a company Mark and Paulette Moore, Mark’s wife, owned together and insured by State Farm.

About six months after the accident, Moore signed an affidavit stating he was not in the course of employment when the car accident occurred and that the State Farm policy was the only liability insurance available that would give Charles coverage for the injuries from the accident.

Continue reading

Published on: | By

biker_motorcycle_stunt_man_0-scaledEven if you have a unique job like a stunt performer, you can still get brought down to Earth by the complexities of determining what your insurance policies do and do not cover if you are involved in an insurance coverage dispute. In that case, it is important to understand the plain language of your insurance contract, how different provisions in the policy interact, and how courts interpret insurance policies. 

Joshua Petrozziello worked as a professional stunt performer at Flypaper Productions. He was injured when a piece of equipment malfunctioned while performing a stunt as part of a movie product. As a result, he filed a lawsuit against Noway, Inc., who had manufactured and operated the equipment, and Employers Fire Insurance Company, who issued Flypaper’s primary and excess general liability policies. 

The parties settled all claims except Petrozziellos’ lawsuit against the excess liability policy from Employers Fire Insurance Company. That insurance policy had an exclusion for injuries sustained by an “employee of any insured” during and during employment. The Petrozziellos argued that this employee-injury exclusion had to be interpreted harmoniously with the “Separation of Insureds” policy provision. They claimed because Petrozziollo was not an employee of Noway, the exclusion did not apply. The trial court agreed with this argument and granted summary judgment in their favor. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

georgia_state_coat_arms-scaledWhen a loved one dies in a car accident, dealing with insurance is likely the last thing on your mind. Unfortunately, insurance policies can be complicated, with many details and exceptions. If you do not fully understand your insurance coverage, you might find yourself in a difficult situation when seeking compensation from your insurance company. This is especially important when your vehicles and insurance policies cover multiple states. 

Cesar Medina was involved in a car accident in Lafayette Parish, Louisiana, that unfortunately resulted in his death. His wife filed a lawsuit against the driver of the other car, its insurer, and Medina’s insurer. The car Medina was driving at the time of the accident was owned by someone who lived in Georgia. 

Medina’s insurer filed a summary judgment motion, arguing Medina’s insurance policy did not cover uninsured/underinsured motorists as of the date of the accident. In addition, the insurer argued the car had a Georgia insurance policy, and the vehicle’s owner had signed a waiver rejecting uninsured motorist coverage. The insurer provided the waiver as evidence. Medina’s wife did not oppose the motion. The trial court found Georgia law governed and granted Medina’s insurer’s summary judgment motion and denied Medina’s wife’s request for a new trial. Medina’s wife then appealed. 

Continue reading
Contact Information
1140 St Charles Ave
New Orleans, LA 70130
Phone: (504) 521-6000Fax: (504) 617-6300

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Berniard Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design