Civil Matter

July 19, 2023

Seeking Justice After a Car Accident: The Importance of Legal Representation for Fair Compensation

accident_car_accident_car-1024x683 Being involved in a car accident is unfortunate, especially when it leaves you with long-term pain and suffering. If your injuries are a direct result of a car accident, you may be entitled to compensation from those who caused them. Rather than risk representing yourself in the legal process and walking away with little to nothing, you need to be represented by a qualified attorney who can assist in getting you the damages you deserve.

Brenda Brown was stopped at a red light when she was rear-ended. The driver of the other vehicle was Homer Sargent, who had been employed by Evans Environmental and Geological Science and Management. Both vehicles were rentals from Enterprise Car Rental.

Brown claimed the car accident caused her numerous personal injuries, entitling her to compensation for not only past, present, and future physical pain and suffering, but also past, present, and future lost wages and earnings. Additionally, she argued she was entitled to damages for her diminished quality of life as well as for severe emotional and mental anguish.

July 17, 2023

Proving Racial Discrimination Claims: The Role of Essential Evidence in Workplace Litigation

by Berniard Law Firm

taiwan_shilin_district_court-1024x768 Racial discrimination in the workplace is a pressing issue that demands attention and action within our legal system. However, bringing a claim of racial discrimination or a hostile work environment requires the ability to substantiate crucial factors. The following case highlights the significance of providing essential evidence when pursuing racial discrimination or hostile work environment claims.

Bobby Whitlock was terminated by his Monroe employer, Lazer Spot, Inc. after it claimed he left the vicinity of a loading dock while the light remained red. Next, Whitlock filed a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Two years later, Whitlock, who is African American, filed a claim against Lazer Spot, Inc., alleging both a hostile work environment and racial discrimination. Lazer Spot, Inc. then filed to dismiss Whitlock’s motion, arguing that his challenges did not state a claim. Next, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana granted Lazer Spot, Inc.’s motion to dismiss and found Whitlock did not state a claim for either his discriminatory discharge allegation or his hostile work environment complaint. This appeal to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal follows.

To be successful with a motion to dismiss claim, the Court of Appeal found, under law, that a complaint has to have adequate factual matter to bring a claim of relief that is facially plausible, including when a plaintiff pleads facts that permits the court to reasonably infer the defendant was liable for the alleged misconduct. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly.

July 16, 2023

Who Pays Who? Important Distinctions in Defining Insurance Terms

by Berniard Law Firm

tug_boat_barge_towing-1024x681 The language used in insurance policies can hold immense significance when determining the resulting coverage and payouts. In a compelling case involving three tug boats, the M/V Miss Dorothy, the M/V Angela Rae, and the M/V Freedom, an unfortunate collision prompted a dispute over insurance claims. As insurers of the Miss Dorothy sought compensation from the owners of the Angela Rae, the crux of the matter revolved around the interpretation of key terms within the insurance policies. The court’s analysis focused on the definition of “tow” and the parties’ intent, underscoring the critical role that precise language plays in insurance contracts. This case serves as a powerful reminder to both drafters and signers of insurance policies that every word holds weight and can shape the outcome of a claim.

Three tug boats, the M/V Miss Dorothy, the M/V Angela Rae, and the M/V Freedom, plied the Mississippi River with a barge boat in tow. The Angela Rae and the Freedom were positioned behind the barge, and the Miss Dorothy was positioned in front. The Angela Rae was designated as the ‘lead tug’, with the other boats acting as ‘assisting tugs.’

In an unfortunate turn of events, the Miss Dorothy collided with a portion of the Sunshine Bridge’s fender. The Miss Dorothy subsequently sank, resulting in a total loss of the ship and its machinery on board. In the ensuing dispute over insurance claims, the insurers of the Miss Dorothy sued the owners of the Angela Rae in its capacity as the lead tug. The two insurers of the Angela Rae, Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company (“Atlantic Specialty”) and P & I Underwriters (“P & I”), both filed motions averring the insurance responsibility to the other, claiming that the other’s policy should be paid out instead of their own.

July 15, 2023

The Who, When, and How of Obtaining Murder Investigation Records in Louisiana

by Berniard Law Firm

table_wood_record_notebook-1024x681 The 1985 murder of Denise Porter by stabbing was a horrific tragedy with life-altering ramifications for her husband, Joel, a Louisiana attorney. It also provides an example of how records from a criminal investigation can and cannot be requested.

In Louisiana, immediate family members (i.e., the surviving spouse, children, grandchildren, or siblings) of a person who died of unnatural causes are entitled to obtain, after ten years has elapsed, unlimited access to investigative records pertaining to the death. La. R.S. 44:3(F).

While the statute provides a straightforward answer to who can obtain these records and when they can be requested, the element of how the information can be accessed created complications for Joel Porter. Record requests must accord with the limitations defined in other applicable laws, for example, Louisiana Code of Evidence, articles 507 and 508, explaining how attorneys can be approached about privileged information.

July 14, 2023

What happens if a roofer is injured while putting a new roof on your house?

by Berniard Law Firm

roofers_job_people_roof-1024x683 When accidents occur on a construction site, questions of liability and responsibility arise, leaving property owners wondering about their potential legal obligations. In a compelling lawsuit from Alexandria, Louisiana, the issue of whether a homeowner can be held liable for injuries sustained by a roofer while working on their property takes center stage. The case of Robert Schram v. Ronnie Waters provides valuable insights into this perplexing matter, shedding light on the factors determining a homeowner’s liability when a roofer falls from their roof.

Robert Schram, an employee of Dan Baker, slipped and fell while working on a tin roof. He fell while trying to catch a nail gun thrown from the ground causing him to break his ankle. He sued the property owner, Ronnie Waters, and his insurer Colony Specialty Insurance Company (Colony), claiming Waters was liable for his injuries because he was supposed to provide the necessary safety materials for the job.

The trial court granted Colony’s and Waters’s joint motion for summary judgment to dismiss the claims, which found no genuine issue of fact on the question of Waters’s liability. Schram appealed, claiming the trial judge committed a legal error in his decision because there are three issues of material fact concerning Waters’s negligence.

July 13, 2023

What Happens When You File a Claim For Workers’ Compensation in the Wrong Court?

by Berniard Law Firm

court_justice_interior_architecture-1024x768 Getting workers’ compensation from an employer is already difficult, but it is even more so when the claim is filed in the wrong court. Although employees are entitled to workers’ compensation, the claim has to be filed in the correct jurisdiction. The following case shows what happens when you are injured while working and attempt to file a claim for workers’ compensation in a state where you were not employed.

Louisiana resident Lemcy Cortez was hired by Triple F Oil Field Service, LLC, to drive trucks in Oklahoma. The day after he arrived in Oklahoma, Cortez was involved in an automobile accident that allegedly led to elbow and back injuries. He filed a Disputed Claim for Compensation in the Louisiana Office of Workers’ Compensation (OWC) against Triple F and its insurer for workers’ compensation benefits which he alleged his employer refused to pay. Triple F and its insurer claimed Cortez lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Triple F believed Cortez was hired in Oklahoma, and Cortez believed he was hired in Louisiana.

Cortez claimed he was hired over the phone in Louisiana, but in his recorded statement to the insurance company’s interviewee, he stated he was hired by Triple F in Oklahoma. Cortez offered two affidavits to support his position that he was hired in Louisiana. In the first, he claimed he contacted Triple F about the job while he was in Louisiana. He claimed he was contacted by Triple F in Louisiana when he was offered the job and accepted it over the phone. In the second, he claimed the company’s Vice President called him to offer him the job, and he knew Cortez lived in Louisiana. In addition, he claimed he understood he had been officially hired by Triple F at that point, and the company had made living arrangements for his move to Oklahoma.

July 12, 2023

Final Judgment Lacking Decretal Language: What Happens to Your Case?

by Berniard Law Firm

school_bus_canada_highway-1024x1024 It is well known that every court order contains a physical copy declaring what the verdict of the case is, otherwise known as a final judgment. However, the order must contain what we call “decretal language.” But what in the world does that mean? The Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal discusses this question and when a final judgment can be amended to contain all the necessary language crucial for the order.

Upon appeal, in the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in the State of Louisiana, Cedrick Laundry alleged that his son, Sengal, was injured when the school bus he was riding hit a curb and ran into a pothole. Defendants (the School Board and others) filed for summary judgment as they believed they were not responsible for Sengal’s injuries.

Summary judgment is when there is no genuine issue of material fact as it pertains to the case. Under Rule 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if the School Board cannot prove its case, the court will dismiss it. The trial court granted their motion for summary judgment but did not state the dismissal of any or all of the claims against the School. The judgment simply stated:

July 11, 2023

When Is a Company Required to Pay for Certain Medical Treatments for Injured Longshore Employees?

by Berniard Law Firm

vessels_beach_brazil_pier-1024x768 Suffering an on-the-job injury is a challenging experience that involves physical recovery and navigating the complexities of the worker’s compensation system. Determining when and how to return to work can be daunting in such situations. The questions surrounding medical examinations and the responsibility of companies to provide additional medical advice or inspections when an employee is injured are examined in the following case.

A longshore foreman, Alexander Scott, injured his hip and lower back when he was hit from behind by a forklift at work. His employer, Port America, set him up with Dr. Steiner, a Physician, to review his injuries. Dr. Steiner told Scott that he reached maximum medical improvement, did not need additional treatment, and was physically fine to continue working. However, Scott was uncomfortable returning to work because he insisted he was still in pain.

Opting not to return to work, Scott sought another doctor’s opinion, Dr. Bostick, who advised him against resuming his employment duties due to his condition. Scott revisited Dr. Steiner, but no additional treatment was provided as his complaints were deemed subjective. Dr. Bostick reiterated his recommendation that Scott abstain from work due to an altered gait, suggesting further physical therapy.

July 10, 2023

Lafayette Court Denied Retaliatory Discharge Claim, Instead Found Employer to be “Very Accommodating”

by Berniard Law Firm

washington_dc_fire_ems-1024x683 In the face of a potentially unlawful termination from your job, navigating the legal landscape can be daunting. If you suspect that you have been fired unjustly, it is essential to understand the critical elements required to bring a lawsuit against your employer for wrongful or retaliatory discharge. A recent Lafayette Parish case highlights the essential evidence to support a retaliatory discharge claim. It highlights the importance of seeking legal guidance when faced with such a situation. By delving into the details of this case, we can uncover the necessary proof required to establish a compelling retaliatory discharge case and empower individuals to protect their rights in the workplace.

Pashine Broussard suffered a workplace accident while employed at Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Center (“Lourdes”). Since the accident in 2006, Lourdes paid Broussard’s medical bills and accommodated her various restrictions, including allowing other employees to perform the tasks she could no longer accomplish until 2010. At that time, Broussard’s surgeon took her off work completely.

Broussard then met with Lourdes to discuss workers’ compensation indemnity benefits. Lourdes, however, informed Broussard that her time to seek these benefits had expired, as her injury occurred over four years ago; however, Broussard was approved to take a leave of absence, expiring in January of 2011. Broussard signed the acknowledgment of the leave time and then subsequently filed a workers’ compensation claim, the latter of which was ultimately denied.

July 9, 2023

Endymion Parade-Goer’s Claim Dismissed as Untimely

by Berniard Law Firm

mardi_gras_parade_new_1-1024x683 New Orleans is well-known for extravagant and entertaining Mardi Gras parades. What happens when an unknown tortfeasor injures someone during a parade? As the following case demonstrates, the claimant only has a certain amount of time to bring a lawsuit against the wrongful party, or they risk dismissal of the claim.

Lillie Love claimed she was injured during a parade of the Gentilly Carnival Club, Inc., d/b/a Krewe of Endymion (“Endymion”), when a float driver hit a metal barricade in front of her. Love then filed a lawsuit against Endymion, its insurer, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London (“Underwriters”), and the unknown driver of the float. Later, Love amended her claim to include Barry Daigle, the driver, and Daigle’s employer, Blaine Kern Artists, Inc. (“BKA”).

Endymion then filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming that Love could not meet her burden of proof under La. R.S.9:2796(A), which requires, in part, for the claimant to prove a deliberate and wanton act or gross negligence on the part of the parade krewe or organization. The Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans granted Endymion’s motion and dismissed Love’s claims against it.