Articles Posted in Car Accident

by

interview_paperwork_quill_law-1024x768When you sign a settlement agreement and release, it is easy to assume you waived all rights to sue over the incident that led to the agreement. However, there are certain circumstances where you should have been provided with relevant information at the time of signing. Therefore, it is crucial to understand your rights and the terms of any agreement. Consulting with a qualified attorney can ensure you are fully informed before signing.

Russell Charles was driving a vehicle while pulling a trailer on I-10 in Iberville Parish, Louisiana. A Dodge Ram truck driven by Mark Moore hit Charles from behind. Moore owned the Dodge Ram truck through his company, Moore Leasing, LLC, which State Farm insured. After the accident, Moore signed an affidavit stating that he was not working at the time of the accident and that only the State Farm insurance policy would provide coverage to Charles. In addition, Charles and his wife, Consandra, signed a release against all persons, firms, or corporations who were or might be liable for the accident in exchange for $50,000. 

Later, the Charleses filed a lawsuit against three companies owned by Moore and his wife, claiming that Moore had been working at the time of the accident, which would make the corporations vicariously liable. The company’s insurer was later added as a defendant. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that Moore had not been working at the time of the accident and that the previous release prevented this lawsuit. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed Charleses’ claims, but they appealed the decision.

Continue reading

by

business_signature_contract_962358-1024x768To avoid a lengthy trial, many lawsuits will be solved through settlements. Settlements may have their requirements, like signing a release. If presented with a release make sure you read it carefully and ensure it includes limiting language if other parties may be at fault. This is a lesson learned by Raymond Cressy when he signed a release form through his power attorney, severely hurting his claims. 

In 2010, Raymond Cressy was a passenger in a 2006 Dodge Durango driven by his brother and owned by his sister, Yolanda, in Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana. The driver swerved to avoid a tire in the roadway when control of the vehicle was lost. The vehicle consequently entered the median and rolled several times. The accident left Raymond a quadriplegic. 

Yolanda, later in 2010, was granted power of attorney over Raymond. In late 2011, acting as Raymond’s power of attorney, Yolanda signed a document titled “Release In Full of All Claims” on Raymond’s behalf with the understanding this was to settle claims against the GEICO insurance company.

Continue reading

by

tilt_trucks_truck_kieswerk-1024x768Workplace accidents can be devastating, and determining fault can be complex and challenging. Clark Nixon, a dump truck driver, recently found himself in this situation after a workplace accident left him injured. While working at a job site for the Terrebonne Levee & Conservation District (“TLCD”), Nixon was involved in an accident with David Danos, an employee of TLCD, acting within the course and scope of his employment. The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the Trial Court’s holding of both parties at fault, and the defendants filed an appeal challenging the allocation of 50% fault to Danos and TLCD. 

At the time of the accident, Nixon was hauling dirt to the job site, where dirt was being stockpiled to build a levee at a later date. The dump truck drivers backed their trucks to unload dirt, and a bulldozer operator would then push the dirt from the pile up a ramp, travel in reverse back down the ramp, and then repeat the process. TLCD also employs a spotter who verifies the dump truck’s load of dirt, documents it, and directs the dump truck drivers where to dump the load of dirt.

Under Louisiana law, courts have adopted a duty-risk analysis in determining whether to impose liability under the general negligence principles. La. C.C. art. 2315. Nixon alleged negligence on the count that he was injured because of the accident and that Danos and TLCD’s negligence was the cause of his injuries. The defendants had denied liability and claimed the accident occurred because of Nixon’s fault. 

Continue reading

by

truck_yellow_toy_dump-768x1024It may not be uncommon to recover less than you had hoped in a personal injury lawsuit. However, challenging the amount of money you are awarded to get more is a challenging feat. A recent case out of the East Baton Rouge Parish explains why courts tend to defer to the jury when awarding damages. 

Stephen Gordon was driving his car on Interstate-10 with his wife, Melissa Gordon, in the passenger seat on the Mississippi River bridge in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. While Gordon was driving in the middle lane, a Mack dump truck was traveling eastbound in the left lane. The truck driver merged into the middle lane and hit Gordon’s car. The Gordons alleged that they were injured in the accident and filed suit. They sued Paul Wright, the driver of the dump truck; Vision Trucking, LLC, the owner of the dump truck; Joseph W. Wright, Jr, the driver’s employer; the owner of Vision Trucking, LLC; and the liability insurer of the driver and Vision Trucking, LLC. Ms. Gordon then settled all her claims against the defendants, and Mr. Gordon’s claims proceeded to trial. 

At trial, the court determined that Mr. Gordon lacked credibility and appeared to exaggerate the extent of his injuries because much of his testimony about his injuries and treatment was contradicted by other evidence. However, the trial court still noted that Mr. Gordon had extensive treatment to his back, neck, and right leg before the accident, which intensified his pre-existing condition. The court awarded Mr. Gordon $15,000 in general damages and $5,092.07 in special damages, and Mr. Gordon appealed. Mr. Gordon argued the trial court failed to award him the full amount he claimed in special damages for his past medical expenses, failed to award future medical expenses for recommended surgeries, and abused its discretion in awarding general damages that were “unreasonably low.” 

Continue reading

by

texture_airbag_car_vehicle-1024x683Car manufacturers have a duty to provide safe vehicles for drivers and passengers. A safe car includes an airbag that can help lessen the effects of an auto accident. What happens when your airbag doesn’t expand during a wreck? Can you sue the manufacturer of that airbag? An Ascension Parish lawsuit shows why the absence of a car that has a defective airbag will cause major headaches for your product liability lawsuit.  

While traveling through Ascension Parish in the summer of 2012, Joseph M. Dortch (“Dortch”) swerved off the road and into a ditch after trying to avoid another vehicle crossing over the centerline of the highway. Dortch was transported to the hospital by ambulance and sustained several injuries. His car was totaled and eventually sold by his insurance company, State Farm Mutual Automobile. 

Following the accident, Dortch sued the other driver and FCA US LLC. Against FCA US LLC, Dortch claimed that the airbags in his vehicle were “unreasonably dangerous” because they failed to deploy during the accident and were, thus, the proximate and contributory cause of his injuries. FCA US LLC  filed a motion for summary judgment in response to these claims, arguing three points to undermine Dortch’s allegations. 

Continue reading

by

padlock_grating_insurance_security-1024x768Protection from on-the-job injury is vital to any employee, especially those doing manual labor. But when so many types and subtypes of insurance coverage are involved in a single policy, how can you know when you’re covered? And what happens when you can’t tell if specific coverage applies to you? Can you still get protection and justice?

In August 2011, plaintiff William Weems was an employee of Cane River Construction LLC (Cane River). While on the job, Weems was driving a car owned by Cane River when another vehicle struck him from behind, and he suffered severe injuries. Defendant Houston Speciality was the automobile insurer for Cane River, and following the accident, Weems and his family sought uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM) coverage from Houston Speciality for his injuries. Houston Speciality denied that its policy extended UM coverage to Cane River and instead filed a third-party complaint against its insurance agent employed by Moreman Moore. 

Moreman Moore’s agent Mr. Dickerson was responsible for completing Houston Specialty’s insurance file. Mr. Dickerson is the agent with whom Cane River’s owner, Mr. Moran, secured the insurance agreement. The Louisiana Commissioner of Insurance requires insurance companies to employ UM waiver forms in their policies and allow their clients to accept or reject UM coverage. Dickerson delivered this waiver to Mr. Moran, and Mr. Moran denied UM coverage via the release. Therefore, Cane River’s insurance policy with Houston Speciality on the accident date thus did not include any UM coverage.

Continue reading

by

paragraph_attorney_judge_process-682x1024The jury process is considered the great equalizer when it comes to the everyday man fighting large corporations. Juries in Louisiana are made up of twelve people tasked with evaluating the evidence and legal arguments of the parties. While juries do, their best mistakes can be made and corrected by the Judge overseeing the case. So what happens if a jury leaves out critical items of a damage award? Can a Judge increase a jury’s award of damages? The following lawsuit out of Lake Charles helps answer this question. 

Dwight Minton was a passenger in a car when he was hit by another vehicle. As a result, he filed a lawsuit against Christopher Gutierrez, the driver of the other vehicle, and GEICO Casualty Company, among others. In addition, Minton sought damages for the injuries sustained in the accident. 

The jury returned a verdict in favor of Minton, awarding damages of fifty-eight thousand five hundred dollars. Believing this award was too low, Minton filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), asking the trial Judge to increase the award. The Judge granted this motion and awarded damages over five hundred thousand dollars. 

Continue reading

by

wall-clock-at-5-50-707582-1024x626A typical work schedule for a full-time employee consist of working seven to eight  hours a day. A customary practice among some employees involves leaving their place of employment a couple minutes before their official workday ends; however, what happens if you are injured during those last few minutes? Are you considered “on the clock?” Can you sue your employer for damages, or are you restricted to workers’ compensation as your only remedy? These are the questions that will be discussed in this article. 

In order to adequately address these issues, we must first define the terms of art. The term “damages” can be defined as financial relief for an injury sustained resulting from another person’s actions or inaction. In tort cases, damages are typically awarded to a party or parties. On the other hand, under Louisiana law, workers’ compensation can be defined as a compromise between the employee and employer or co-employee that allows the injured employee to recover benefits in accordance with the statute La. R.S. 23:1031. Workers’ Compensation will create immunity for the employer or co-employee from civil tort lawsuits, except when intentional acts causing the injury are present. Therefore, workers’ compensation is the exclusive remedy for most injured employees under Louisiana law.

In this case, there are multiple parties. The first party is the plaintiff, Ms. Frazier, who is the injured employee seeking recovery. The second and third parties are the defendants, the City of Shreveport in the Airfield Maintenance Division (the employer), and Mr. Patterson (the co-employee). Both Ms. Frazier and Mr. Patterson are employees for the City of Shreveport in the Airfield Maintenance Division. Ms. Frazier’s work schedule consisted of eight hours a day, arriving at eight o’clock in the morning and leaving work at five o’clock in the afternoon. On January 22, 2013, Ms. Frazier engaged in the customary practice of leaving work shortly before 5:00 p.m. During that time, she proceeded to the employee parking lot and entered her car. Soon thereafter, Ms. Frazier was involved in a low-impact collision with Mr. Patterson.  Unbeknownst to Mr. Patterson, he backed a city-owned truck into the rear bumper of Ms. Frazier’s personal vehicle. Ms. Frazier was then taken to the hospital for an examination. 

Continue reading

by

roof_tile_roofs_house-1024x768If you are injured by someone in their course of employment, you can contact their employer for your compensation. But unfortunately, employers hire independent contractors to skirt around liability when their workers mess up. Below is a cautionary tale about how cascading levels of independent contractors left an injured plaintiff with limited sources for his injuries. 

Jarrett Lemmon was in an accident involving Jonathan De La Mora that resulted in damage and injury. Lemmon sued Jonathan for causing the accident. Later, Lemmon amended his suit to add Jonathan’s employer, Rosendo De La Mora, and RoofCorp USA, LLC, as responsible for the accident, claiming that Jonathan was working within the scope of his employment when he struck Lemmon. RoofCorp USA, LLC was the parent company that hired Rosendo De La Mora to install roofs as an independent contractor. Rosendo De La Mora then hired his son Jonathan to help install the roofs, separate from RoofCorp’s payroll. RoofCorp filed a motion for summary judgment at the district court level, claiming they could not be held responsible; it was granted.  Unhappy with the ruling, Lemmon appealed.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals was then tasked with deciding if the trial court properly awarded RoofCorp summary judgment. To do so, the appeals court must determine if Jonathan was an employee of Roofcorp at the time of the accident, and the court must decide if Jonathan was in the scope of his employment when the accident occurred. Lemmon claims that Jonathan was an employee of RoofCorp in the court of his employment when he hit Lemmon. 

Continue reading

by

parking_asphalt_parking_lot-1024x768In automobile accident cases, determining the drivers’ liability is often the core issue in determining damages. Unfortunately, who is at fault in a car accident in a parking lot can be tricky. The following lawsuit out of Lake Charles shows how courts weigh the evidence and come to conclusions in parking lot collisions. 

 The case stems from an automobile accident in a business parking lot. Johnnell Duncan alleged that she was traveling through an intersection and stopped at a “stop line” painted on the pavement another vehicle driven by Alexa Miller hit her.  

Duncan filed a lawsuit against Miller and her insurance company State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. The two parties offered contrary views of evidence in the trial court. Miller claimed she was not speeding while turning, while Duncan didn’t stop at the stop line. In addition, Duncan alleged that Miller was holding a cell phone at the time of the accident, which Miller denied. The trial court ruled in favor of Duncan. Miller and State Farm appealed the ruling to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit.

Continue reading
Contact Information
1140 St Charles Ave
New Orleans, LA 70130
Phone: (504) 521-6000
Fax: (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 © 2016 – 2024, Berniard Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design