Articles Posted in Pain And Suffering Claims

by

ford_e_series_wagon_10-1024x814Customers have an expectation of safety while shopping in retail stores. When a customer is injured while on the premise, they are entitled to damages. However, a customer may only recover damages if adequate proof is shown. Proof of an unreasonable risk of harm is a critical element of Louisiana slip and fall cases. The following case out of Slidell, Louisiana, shows why facts are crucial when pursuing a slip and fall lawsuit.

Hope Held was injured while shopping at Home Depot with her child. She alleged her injuries were due to the misplacement of a wire hand truck(truck) in the electronic section of the store. After her fall, she was found by an employee, Jeffrey Crossland, and was escorted out of the aisle to receive help and complete an accident report.

Held filed a lawsuit for her injuries against Home Depot. The store responded by successfully filing a motion for summary judgment in the trial court. Held disagreed and appealed the judgment to the appellate court.

Continue reading

by

texas_flag_texas_flag-1024x683Have you ever been involved in a car accident that potentially involved two states and wondered which state’s laws would govern your personal injury lawsuit? Say, you have an insurance policy issued in Texas, and you get into a car wreck in Louisiana. Which state’s laws will apply if you file a lawsuit related to the accident? The following case shows how Louisiana Courts use a choice of law analysis to determine what state laws should apply in these situations. 

Rafael Garces-Rodriguez and Julio Alonso (Rafels) were involved in a car accident when another motorist struck their car from behind. At the time of the accident, they were insured by Progressive County Mutual Insurance Company. Two years after the accident, Rafels filed a lawsuit against Progressive seeking compensation for their injuries and other damages sustained during the car accident. Progressive filed a motion with the court seeking dismissal of the case, asserting that Rafels rejected uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage (UM coverage). 

Progressive argued that Texas law should apply in the case because the policies were issued in Texas. Under Texas law, rejection for UM coverage is required to be in writing. However, there are no other special procedures or particular language that needs to be used for the writing. See: Ortiz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 955 S.W.2d 353 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1997, pet. denied). A satisfactory rejection in Texas requires minimal effort by the insured. 

Continue reading

by

feet_toe_human_body-1024x683No one wants to experience pain and suffering after spending money and time getting surgery. Nonetheless, some people fall victim to these complications. A person can be prone to injury when a defective product is inserted into their body. This was the case with Kale Flagg.

Kale Flagg underwent foot surgery to install toe implants made by Stryker Corporation (“Stryker”) and Memometal Incorporated (“Memometal”) (collectively, the “Manufacturers”). Unfortunately, several months after the surgery, Flagg’s implants broke and caused him extreme pain. This resulted in him undergoing multiple surgeries to try to fix the problem. 

Flagg filed a lawsuit against the Manufacturers alleging implants were defective, which caused his ongoing suffering and deformity. The Manufacturers responded by seeking a motion to dismiss under the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and the district court granted the motion. Flagg appealed.

Continue reading

by

money_change_penny_quarter-1024x962Calculating appropriate damages for a plaintiff who experiences ongoing injuries from a vehicle accident is complex. Jury awards generally are left undisturbed by appellate courts. The following lawsuit shows how the appeals process can alter a jury’s award for mental and physical pain and suffering. 

On October 1, 2009, Patricia Aguillard was driving on the interstate when she slowed her vehicle due to traffic ahead. Jeremie Gregory was driving behind Aguillard and rear-ended her vehicle. As a result of the accident, Aguillard experienced extensive physical injuries and mental health issues. As a result, Aguillard filed a lawsuit for damages for her medical issues and vehicle damage against Mr. Gregory and the owner of his vehicle, the City of Baton Rouge. 

The trial court found in favor of Aguillard after a jury trial, determining that Mr. Gregory was 100% at fault for the accident. The jury awarded her $122,751 for past medical expenses and $450,150 for future medical expenses, totaling $572,901. However, Aguillard filed a motion for a Judgment Not Withstanding the Verdict (JNOV) in response to this award, claiming that the jury erred when it failed to award her more money for future medical expenses and general damages. The court denied her claim for more in future medical expenses but granted the JNOV as to general damages. The court granted the following amounts: $350,000 for physical pain and suffering, $75,000 for mental pain and suffering, and $15,000 for loss of enjoyment of life. This brought Aguillard’s total award to $1,012,901. 

Continue reading

by

accident_auto_damage_vehicle_2-1024x768Automotive accidents can cause severe injuries to those involved. However, the testimony of accident reconstruction experts can help juries determine what happened and come to the correct conclusions about liability. The following lawsuit out of Baton Rouge shows how an accident reconstruction expert can help you win your automobile accident lawsuit.

In December 2012, Lisa Lirrochi was involved in a collision with a Peterbilt garbage truck driven by David Washington. At the time of the accident, Washington was in his capacity as an employee of Ace Waste Systems, Inc. Ms. Lirrochi was driving behind Washington’s truck around 4:30 A.M. when he moved the truck left into another lane in preparation to make a right-hand turn into a driveway. The two vehicles then collided. 

Lirrochi filed a lawsuit against Washington, Ace Waste, and the company’s insurer, alleging injuries and ongoing pain due to the accident. In return, Ace Waste filed a reconventional demand for the loss of its garbage truck. Lirrochi testified that she did not see Washington use his right turn signal and move into a clear open lane ahead. However, Washington testified that he did use his right-turn signal. 

Continue reading

by

massage_therapy_spa_health-1024x768An injury on the job is never easy to deal with, especially when it results in a permanent disability affecting your ability to perform your regular job functions. A functional capacity evaluation (FCE) may be conducted at the employer’s expense to identify the parameters the claimant may return to work. However, a recent opinion from the Supreme Court of Louisiana held that a claimant does not have the right to choose a physical therapist to conduct the FCE at the employer’s expense. This may raise concerns for claimants who struggle to get back to work.

In May 2006, Paula Clavier sustained injuries to her neck, shoulder, and back while lifting an object, she believed to be lighter than it was. It is not disputed that this injury occurred on the job within the scope of her employment with Coburn Supply Co. Inc. (Coburn) in Harvey, Louisiana. After significant treatment, Corburn ordered an independent medical examination (IME), wherein their doctor, Dr. W. Stan Foster, opined that Clavier should receive an FCE to determine her work ability as she reached maximum medical improvement and would not require further treatment.

Since Clavier initially refused to attend the FCE, the employer filed a motion to compel the FCE, which was to be with a physician they chose. The Workers’ Compensation Court granted this motion.  Upon completion of the FCE, Ms. Clavier did not agree with the findings. She filed a motion requesting that the FCE be conducted with a physician of her choice to compare with the FCE performed by the employer’s physician. Clavier wanted to use an FCE conducted with her physical therapist and argued that Coburn should be responsible for paying for the same. 

Continue reading

by

inside_ambulance_ambulance_lighting-1024x576Physically demanding jobs can result in workplace injuries that prevent employees from working and earning a wage. However, it is essential when filing a worker’s compensation claim not only to prove your claim but to do so within the timelines required by the courts. A workplace accident claim filed in Metairie, Louisiana shows the importance of timeliness in workers’ compensation lawsuits and helps answer the question; What is the Deadline to File a Workers’ Compensation Claim in Louisiana?

Tramaine Eugene-Robinson was working as an EMT for East Jefferson General Hospital in late 2014. While transporting a patient on a stretcher, a malfunction occurred, causing her to drop the patient and injure her back and knees. When EJGH did not pay her wage benefits, Ms. Eugene-Robinson sued in 2017, alleging that she had suffered an injury of a “developmental nature,” meaning that the injury developed sometime after the actual accident. Although EJGH acknowledged that the plaintiff had experienced an injury at work, they argued that her claim was untimely under La. R.S. 23:1209(A).

La. R.S. 23:1209(A) sets time limits on worker’s compensation claims. The courts have recognized two different situations that establish the date that an injury turns into a disability: 1) the date the employee must stop working due to the injury or 2) the date that an employee is diagnosed as disabled. Winford v. Conerly Corp.

Continue reading

by

washing_machine_dryer_laundry-1024x768Many jobs require physical labor, which comes with some risks of injury on the clock, especially for those who install and move equipment. Sometimes you get injured while working, and you think, “maybe I can just work through this.” However, if you attempt to work through an injury and don’t report it immediately to your employer, they may try to avoid paying you workers’ compensation benefits. This happened to James Payton, a veteran and previous employee of NASA. Payton’s case helps answer the question; Can I get Workers’ Compensation Benefits if I Don’t Immediately Report My Injury? 

James Payton began working for Sears in 2013. Before this position, Payton served in the military and worked for NASA for 31 years. He was hired at Sears as an appliance technician, which requires some physical labor. During a shift, Payton was installing a washer/dryer in a residence and injured his back. Payton had never been involved in another accident or had injured his back before his employment with Sears. 

Payton continued working after his injury in the hope it would correct itself. Unfortunately, the injury worsened over the next few days, and Payton found it challenging to complete simple actions, such as getting out of bed or driving a car. After visiting a physician and receiving an MRI, it was confirmed that Payton had herniated discs in his lower back, and he was advised to avoid heavy lifting. He then reported his medical diagnosis to Sears approximately a month after the initial injury.  

Continue reading

by

request_hooks_chain_steel-1024x683If you are involved in a lawsuit, you probably have a lot of things on your mind. However, you must pay attention to the required deadlines and time to respond to documents from the other side, including requests for admission. If you do not respond on time, you might be deemed to have admitted to facts that are helpful to the other side. That could cause significant implications for your lawsuit. The following Louisiana lawsuit shows the deadline to answer and the effect of admission requests.

Steven Richard was involved in a car accident in Concordia Parish, Louisiana, involving a vehicle driven by Fred Taylor. Richard later sued Taylor, Fred’s Automotive (the shop where Taylor’s vehicle was repaired), and Caitlin Insurance, the insurance company that covered Fred’s Automotive. 

Fred’s Automotive and Caitlin Insurance brought a motion for summary judgment. They argued they could not be liable to Richard because their limited liability company had not existed when the accident occurred. As evidence, they introduced a printout with the relevant recording and other operating information for their limited liability company. The trial court granted their motion for summary judgment and dismissed the claims against Fred’s Automotive and Caitlin Insurance.

Continue reading

by

wooden_pallets_pallets_stack-768x1024If you have ever watched a legal television show, you have seen the wide variety of evidence presented. Even if your lawsuit is not as high-stakes as the latest murder mystery show, it is still important to present sufficient evidence to satisfy your burden of proof and prevail on your claim. Otherwise, your case could get dismissed on a motion for summary judgment. The following lawsuit involving a slip in fall in a Louisiana convenience store discusses the concept of open and obvious risks.

Moore drove his car to a Murphy Oil gas station in Hammond, Louisiana. After he had purchased some items in the convenience store, he walked towards the door.  While he reached for the door, he turned back and talked to the store manager.  As he left the store, his foot contacted a pallet display stand with water bottles that were located right outside the door.  He tripped and stumbled but did not fall.  Moore reported this to the store manager. Afterward, he received treatment for his back pain. Murphy Oil paid for this treatment for about four months.  

When Murphy Oil stopped paying for his treatment, Moore filed a lawsuit alleging that the display with water bottles was an unreasonably dangerous condition. The defendants, Murphy Oil and Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance, filed a motion for summary judgment. The court denied this motion, and the case went to trial.  Before trial, Moore agreed that his damages were not over $50,000. At the trial, the court ruled in favor of Moore and awarded damages of $37,500. After they lost, Murphy Oil and Liberty Mutual appealed, arguing that the trial court incorrectly denied their summary judgment motion. 

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