Articles Posted in Negligence

jon-tyson-FlHdnPO6dlw-unsplash-769x1024In personal injury law, the concept of “prescription” plays a crucial role. It’s essentially a deadline for filing a lawsuit; if you miss it, your claim could be barred forever. A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal case, Jones v. Iberia Parish Government et al., highlights the importance of understanding prescription rules, especially when multiple parties might be involved.

Agnes Jones slipped and fell on an allegedly defective walkway in New Iberia, Louisiana. Within the one-year prescription period, she filed a lawsuit against the property owner and the Iberia Parish Government. However, almost three years after the accident, she amended her lawsuit to include the City of New Iberia as a defendant.

The City of New Iberia filed an exception of prescription, arguing that Jones’ claim against them was filed too late. The trial court agreed and dismissed Jones’ claims against the City. Jones appealed this decision.

pexels-pixabay-532001-1024x683In a recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision, a case involving a police shooting during an arrest attempt highlighted the complexities of qualified immunity for law enforcement officers. The case, Marshall v. Sandifer, centered around Ervin Marshall, who was shot by a state trooper while attempting to evade arrest. The court ultimately upheld the trooper’s immunity, but the decision provides important insights into the limits and application of this legal protection.

In 2010, Louisiana State Trooper Jared Sandifer and other officers were attempting to arrest Ervin Marshall on an outstanding warrant. They located him at his girlfriend’s apartment, and after obtaining permission to enter, they conducted a search. Trooper Sandifer found Marshall hiding in a closet. When Marshall made a sudden movement, Trooper Sandifer, fearing for his safety, shot him in the abdomen.

Marshall later sued Trooper Sandifer, the Louisiana State Police, and its superintendent, alleging negligence and excessive force. The defendants claimed immunity under Louisiana law, arguing that Trooper Sandifer’s actions were discretionary and within the scope of his lawful duties.

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.

pexels-shvetsa-3845653-1024x683A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision, Brimmer v. Eagle Family Dental, Inc., has underscored the critical procedural steps involved in bringing dental malpractice claims in the state. The case highlights the necessity of first presenting claims against qualified healthcare providers to a medical review panel before filing a lawsuit. Let’s delve into the specifics of this case and its implications for dental malpractice litigation in Louisiana.

Case Summary

Aurielle Brimmer received dental treatment at Eagle Family Dental, Inc. She subsequently developed complications that sheF attributed to the dental procedure. Believing she had suffered dental malpractice, Ms. Brimmer bypassed the medical review panel process and directly filed a lawsuit against Eagle Family Dental.

pexels-kampus-8441811-1024x684A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision underscores the importance of insurance agents fulfilling their duties with reasonable diligence and care. In Upscale Fashions, Inc. v. Botsay Insurance Network, Inc., an insurance agent’s failure to properly procure and communicate coverage details led to a significant financial loss for the insured and a hefty judgment against the agency.

Case Summary

Upscale Fashions, Inc., a retail clothing company, purchased a property insurance policy through Botsay Insurance Network, Inc. The policy initially included wind and hail coverage. However, this crucial coverage was excluded when the policy was renewed, allegedly without Upscale’s knowledge.

pexels-pixabay-236380-1024x678In a heart-wrenching case involving the sexual assault of a patient at an outpatient psychiatric treatment facility, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, recently affirmed a summary judgment that dismissed claims against two individual owners/officers of the facility. The decision, handed down in Sam v. Genesis Behavioral Hospital, underscores the legal complexities surrounding personal liability for corporate officers in cases of negligence. Let’s delve into the details of the case and its implications.

Facts and Procedural History

The plaintiff, Jessica Charles, attended an outpatient program at Genesis Behavioral Hospital. Tragically, she was lured off the premises by another patient, Dave Carter, Jr., and was subsequently raped and exposed to HIV. Understandably, Ms. Charles filed a lawsuit seeking damages from Mr. Carter and Genesis Behavioral Hospital, its insurer, and its officers, Will Arledge and Gretchen Karltenbach.

pexels-chokniti-khongchum-1197604-2280547-684x1024In a recent decision, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, underscored the importance of adhering to procedural rules in medical malpractice cases. The case, Ogbebor v. Lafayette General Medical Center, involved the death of Mary Ogbebor and her husband’s subsequent lawsuit against the medical professionals involved in her care. The court’s decision ultimately hinged on the plaintiff’s failure to provide timely expert testimony, leading to the reinstatement of a summary judgment in favor of the defendants. This blog post will delve into the case details, the court’s reasoning, and the implications for future medical malpractice litigation in Louisiana.

Case Background

Mary Ogbebor sought medical attention at Lafayette General Medical Center for chest discomfort and related symptoms. She was discharged after undergoing procedures performed by Dr. Salvaggio and Dr. Cavros. However, Mrs. Ogbebor returned to the emergency room a few days later with severe chest pain and tragically passed away.

pexels-chevanon-1108101-1024x682In today’s interconnected world, it’s not uncommon for employees to find themselves working across state lines. But what happens when an injury occurs in a different state than where the employment contract was formed? Whose laws apply? Can an injured worker sue their employer, or are they limited to workers’ compensation benefits? These questions were at the heart of the recent case Creel v. International-Matex Tank Terminals.

Richard Creel, an electrician, was injured while working at an IMTT facility in New Jersey. His employer, Versatech, was based in Louisiana. While Creel received workers’ compensation benefits in Louisiana, he also wanted to sue IMTT for negligence.

IMTT argued it was immune from lawsuits because it was Creel’s “statutory employer” under Louisiana law. Creel countered that New Jersey law should apply, and under that law, he had the right to sue. The initial court sided with IMTT, but an appeals court overturned that decision, sending the case back to the lower court for further review.

pexels-pixabay-209112-1024x598Imagine moving into your new apartment, only to find it’s more like a horror movie set than a cozy home. Mold creeping up the walls, evidence of unwanted rodent roommates… it’s enough to make anyone sick. But does that automatically mean your landlord is liable? A recent court case dives deep into this messy situation, highlighting the legal hurdles tenants face when seeking damages for a less-than-habitable dwelling.

Dewayne Montgomery, our tenant-turned-plaintiff, found himself in this exact predicament. He sued his landlord, Garry Lewis, claiming the apartment was riddled with mold and rat droppings, causing him various health issues. Montgomery alleged negligence, breach of contract, and even emotional distress as a result of his claimed paltry living conditions.

Lewis denied responsibility, arguing Montgomery couldn’t prove the mold caused his health problems or that Lewis knew about any pre-existing issues.

pexels-kelly-1179532-2898199-1024x575Contracting and subcontracting in the construction industry are standard practices. However, they can create several challenges when a worker is injured. What happens, for instance, when the employee of a subcontractor is injured by a device owned and operated by a municipal government unconnected to the construction project at hand? The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal recently addressed this question when a worker was injured by an overhead power line. 

Brendan Sharp was employed by RedIron Construction, a Legacy Construction Services subcontractor. Legacy had been hired by Cummins Mid-South Diesel in Morgan City to construct a building, and Legacy brought RedIron in to install metal siding on the structure’s exterior. Sharp’s injury occurred when he touched one of the metal siding panels to a live overhead power line owned by Morgan City.

Sharp sued for damages, naming only Morgan City as a defendant. Morgan City then filed a third-party demand against both Legacy and RedIron, arguing that Morgan City itself was not liable for any damages due to Legacy’s and RedIron’s failure to comply with Louisiana’s Overhead Power Line Safety Act (OPLSA). La. R.S. 45:141. RedIron and Legacy then filed motions for summary judgment, contending that they were, in fact, in compliance with OPLSA.

Contact Information