Articles Posted in Semi Truck Accident

by

pexels-phenyo-deluxe-427483-1486188-1024x683In the realm of personal injury law, a recent Louisiana Court of Appeal case has highlighted the potential pitfalls of multiple lawsuits arising from the same accident. The case, Wicker v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, et al., involved a car accident where the plaintiff, Joy Wicker, initially filed a suit through her insurer, State Farm, followed by a separate personal injury lawsuit. The defendants tried to dismiss the second suit based on the doctrine of res judicata, but the Court of Appeal overturned the trial court’s decision, emphasizing the distinct nature of the two claims.

In 2015, Joy Wicker was involved in a car accident with Cathy Craddock. State Farm, Wicker’s insurer, filed a lawsuit in City Court against Craddock and her insurer, Louisiana Farm Bureau, seeking reimbursement for property damage, rental car payments, and medical payments made to Wicker.

Subsequently, Wicker filed a separate lawsuit in the 19th Judicial District Court, seeking damages for her personal injuries from the same accident.

Continue reading

by

pexels-pixabay-163016-1024x645A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal case sheds light on the complexities of personal injury claims following car accidents, particularly when pre-existing conditions are involved. In the case of Lewis v. Fowler, the plaintiffs were involved in a minor accident and subsequently claimed significant damages for aggravated chronic pain. However, the court ultimately ruled that their pre-existing conditions were not substantially worsened by the accident and that they had been adequately compensated by the initial settlement from the at-fault driver’s insurance. This decision highlights the importance of establishing a clear causal link between the accident and any claimed aggravation of pre-existing conditions and the challenges plaintiffs face in proving damages when their medical history is complex.

Walter and Beverly Lewis were rear-ended at a stoplight. While the accident was minor, with no damage to the other vehicle and only slight damage to their own, the Lewises claimed the accident aggravated their pre-existing back and neck pain. They initially settled with the at-fault driver’s insurance company but then filed a claim against their uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM) carrier, State Farm, alleging their damages exceeded the initial settlement.

The trial court ruled in favor of State Farm, finding that the Lewises failed to prove their chronic pain was aggravated by the accident beyond a brief period. It determined that the initial settlement adequately compensated for any injuries or aggravations caused by the accident.

Continue reading

by

pexels-kartatos-10622718-683x1024In a recent personal injury case, Latulippe v. West Jefferson Medical Center, the Louisiana Court of Appeal tackled the complexities of assessing damages in a car accident case where the plaintiffs had pre-existing medical conditions. The case arose from a rear-end collision on the Crescent City Connection bridge involving an ambulance. While the defendant admitted fault, the extent of the plaintiffs’ injuries and the appropriate compensation became the central point of contention. The appellate court ultimately affirmed the trial court’s decision, highlighting the importance of proving causation and the impact of injuries on the plaintiffs’ lives, even with pre-existing conditions.

Two brothers, Daniel and Casey Latulippe, were rear-ended by a West Jefferson Medical Center (WJMC) ambulance while stopped in traffic. The ambulance driver admitted fault, stating he didn’t brake to avoid the collision out of concern for the patient and EMT in the back.

Both brothers, along with their wives, sued WJMC for damages. The case went to trial, focusing solely on causation and the extent of the brothers’ injuries.

Continue reading

by

The recent decision in Anderson v. State from the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, highlights the complexities of assessing damages in personal injury cases, particularly when the plaintiff has pre-existing medical conditions. The court’s ruling underscores the principle that even if a plaintiff has prior health issues, a defendant can still be held liable for exacerbating those conditions due to their negligence. This blog post will analyze the critical aspects of the Anderson case and its implications for personal injury claims in Louisiana.

Laura Anderson was involved in a car accident with Marlys Sanders, an employee of the State of Louisiana. Both parties had conflicting accounts of how the accident occurred. A jury found both parties 50% at fault but awarded Anderson no damages, concluding she didn’t sustain any injuries from the accident. Anderson appealed this decision.

The medical evidence presented at trial showed that Anderson had several pre-existing conditions, including diabetes, high blood pressure, and prior injuries from previous car accidents. However, she argued that the accident worsened her existing conditions.

Continue reading

by

car_accident_accident_dig-1024x775After being involved in a motor vehicle accident, you will likely be left with various damages, including medical injuries. Although you may assume insurance will cover all of your injuries and related damages, this is not always the case. The following Ouachita Parish case demonstrates the importance of understanding your policies and legal rights when it comes to motor vehicle insurance claims and of hiring an experienced attorney if you are left unsure of these rights.  

Alcender Williams, Jr. was injured while crossing an intersection and being hit by a motor vehicle. Williams subsequently filed a claim to the insurance company of the vehicle’s owner, Sharon Davis, where he and the company, Progressive Security Insurance (hereinafter referred to as Progressive), agreed to a settlement amount; Williams, however, resided with his mother, Bernadene Hubbard, at the time of the motor vehicle accident, and reserved his rights under her uninsured/underinsured motorist insurer Affirmative Casualty Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as Affirmative). He then filed a claim asserting the limits of the Progressive policy was not enough to compensate him for his various damages. Williams’ claim was then rejected by Affirmative, who argued he was not included as a driver under the policy.  

Williams then filed a lawsuit against Affirmative, where the trial and appeal courts found in favor of his claims for coverage. Affirmative was subsequently declared insolvent and, as a result, Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (hereinafter referred to as LIGA) took over the discharge of its obligation with regard to claims as provided by law. 

Continue reading

by

us_navy_021209_n_6-1024x672Countless people are at risk of being in a car accident every day. Imagine you are on your usual morning commute to work, but suddenly someone rear-ends you causing injuries that change your life forever. You deserve to be compensated as much as you can to restore yourself to the state you were in before the accident. However, what happens when the defendants appeal the amount of damages you are supposed to receive?

On December 9, 2013, a traffic accident occurred when the automobile operated by the defendant, Justin Wascom, Jr., owned by his employer, Clean Water Opportunities, Inc. (“Clean Water”), and insured by Hallmark Specialty Insurance Company (“Hallmark Insurance”), rear-ended the automobile operated by the plaintiff, Evette Neal. Mr. Wascom was driving the automobile when he rear-ended Ms. Neal’s vehicle. Her vehicle hit the side concrete wall, left the roadway, flipped over, hit a tree, and finally stopped in a canal. Ms. Neal filed suit against Mr. Wascom, Clean Water, and Hallmark Insurance, seeking damages for injuries to her neck, back, shoulders, legs, chest, sternoclavicular (“SC”) joint, collarbone, hands, and fingers allegedly sustained as a result of the accident. 

On March 15, 2016, a trial was conducted as to the issue of damages. At trial, the parties stipulated to liability and insurance coverage. On April 1, 2016, Ms. Neal was awarded various amounts for general damages, medical expenses, future medical expenses for continued operations, lost wages, and all costs of the proceedings. However, Mr. Wascom and Hallmark Insurance appealed stating there was an error as to the amount of general damages awarded to the plaintiff. The defendants argued that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding $700,000 to Ms. Neal for her injuries. These injuries included a partially dislocated SC joint, a strained shoulder, a strained neck, and a strained back. However, the defendants assert that Ms. Neal already had neck and shoulder injuries prior to the accident and they were only made worse by the accident. The defendants also asserted that she only missed one month of work and she now has full range of motion in her shoulder and arm. 

Continue reading

by

driving_school_driving_car-1024x685If you want to decline uninsured/underinsured (“UM”) coverage, you might think it is sufficient to merely tell your insurer you do not want UM coverage. However, under Louisiana law, there are strict requirements with which you must comply in order to validly waive UM coverage. What happens if the insured does not follow those formal requirements?  

Joey Higginbotham worked as a truck driver for Dupre Logistics. He was involved in a car accident while on the job. He filed a lawsuit against the other driver and his insurer, USAgencies. He also added Dupre’s liability insurer, Zurich, and sought UM coverage under its policy. 

Zurich claimed Dupre had waived its UM coverage and moved for summary judgment. Higginbotham also filed a summary judgment motion, arguing Dupre’s supposed waiver was not valid under Louisiana law. 

Continue reading

by

accident_auto_crash_car-1-1024x768Car accidents can often give rise to lawsuits with complicated issues of causation and damages. Often, one or both sides will have expert witnesses to help explain complicated issues to the jury. What happens if one side argues the other side’s expert witness should not be allowed to testify as an expert witness?

Sherman Turner was driving an 18-wheeler owned by AAA Cooper, his employer. While on the job and making a delivery in Alexandria, Louisiana, he accidentally missed where he was supposed to turn. Turner turned into another street to turn around the 18-wheeler. Chelsea Mace claimed she turned on to the same street as Turner, saw the 18-wheeler, and stopped her car five feet behind it. She claimed while her car was stopped, Turner started to reverse the 18-wheeler and ran into her car. Mace claimed as a result of the accident, she injured her back and her doctor recommended she undergo a lumbar fusion. A jury found Turner was not at fault for the accident. Mace appealed.

On appeal, Mace argued the trial court erred in allow defendant’s expert, Joseph Peles to testify as an expert in accident reconstruction and biomechanical engineering. Article 702 of the Louisiana Code of Evidence governs whether given expert testimony is admissible. At trial, Mace filed a Daubert challenge, arguing Peles should not be allowed to testify as an expert. Prior to being qualified as an expert, Peles explained his education and professional background involving biomechanical engineering and reconstruction. 

Continue reading

by

vehicle_cargo_industry_1562094-1024x785Licensed and professional commercial truck drivers usually carry heavy materials on their journey. Keeping these materials secured for any type of roadway issue is paramount. But what happens when these large trucks roll over and you think the weight shift was due to faulty or improper packaging? The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals addresses the question as to whether there is enough evidence to bring a claim for a packaging malfunction that leaves you injured.

On January 17, 2014, Danny Barefoot exited the highway in his vehicle in Shreveport, Louisiana, lost control of his eighteen-wheeler truck, and rolled over. The exit rant was looped, and as he exited, the lumber he was carrying shifted, causing Barefoot to crash. Barefoot filed suit against Weyerhaeuser, claiming the company did not package the joists properly, causing the bands to break and the lumber to shift, which led to the truck rolling over.

Weyerhaeuser attempted to move for summary judgment. When a defendant moves for summary judgment, the plaintiff must make a positive showing of facts to support their claim. See La. R.S. 9:2800.6(A). In this instance, Barefoot would have to prove with enough evidence that Weyerhaeuser caused his injury from the truck rolling over.

Continue reading

by

car_accident_bellingham_fire-1024x683Ordinarily, when one is involved in an automobile accident, the injured party files a claim with the at-fault driver’s insurance company.  When a person is involved in an accident with a co-worker in the course of their employment duties, however, the injured party may collect workers’ compensation instead. Can the injured employee “double-dip” and also collect under a Uninsured/underinsured motorist policy?  This was the issue in a recent case out of Delcambre, Louisiana.   

Annique Johnson, Wanda Theriot, and Emily Laester were employees of Le Bon Manger, Inc. While acting within the course and scope of their employment; the employees were in a car accident while Laester was driving.  Laester was at fault, and the employees sustained injuries.  Johnson and Theriot filed claims for workers’ compensation benefits and settled those claims.  Later, Johnson and Theriot (Plaintiffs) filed a civil lawsuit against their employer, Laester, and State Farm under separate policies for each party.  State Farm filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the case because the Plaintiffs already collected under workers’ compensation law.  The plaintiffs appealed to the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal.       

Under Louisiana law, fellow employees have statutory immunity from lawsuits brought by co-employees for which workers’ compensation laws provide the sole remedy.  See La. R.S. 23:1032.  This lack of standing to bring a lawsuit automatically means there can be no lawsuit against the co-employee car insurance company.  See Hebert v. Clarendon Am. Ins. Co.  Essentially, the availability of workers’ compensation erases the existence of an uninsured/underinsured motorist and erases the availability of that coverage.  

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 – 2025, Berniard Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design