Articles Posted in Pain And Suffering Claims

pexels-pixabay-269630-1-1024x683In a recent decision by the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Golden Nugget Lake Charles, LLC, emerged victorious in a slip and fall case brought forth by Carolyn A. Watts. The case revolved around Ms. Watts’ alleged injuries sustained from a fall on the casino’s premises.

Ms. Watts initially filed a petition claiming she slipped and fell on a wet floor within the Golden Nugget casino lobby. However, during her deposition, she clarified that the incident occurred on the boardwalk outside the casino while it was raining. Ms. Watts attributed her fall to the wet conditions and alleged injuries to her right shoulder, neck, and back.

Golden Nugget filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the accident took place outside the casino, on the boardwalk, during rainy conditions. They contended that Ms. Watts could not establish that the walkway posed a hazard or that Golden Nugget’s negligence contributed to the incident. They supported their motion with evidence, including Ms. Watts’ deposition transcript, surveillance video of the incident, and an affidavit from their Risk Manager confirming the rainy weather and lack of prior complaints about the boardwalk.

pexels-pixabay-261621-1024x768Navigating the workers’ compensation system can be overwhelming when you’ve been injured on the job. You may be tempted to accept a quick settlement to cover immediate medical bills and lost wages. However, it’s crucial to understand the long-term implications of such a decision. A recent Louisiana case highlights the importance of carefully considering settlement agreements in workers’ compensation claims.

Benny Hernandez was injured at work in 2014. He initially filed a workers’ compensation claim, represented by an attorney, and reached a settlement with his employer and its insurer. The settlement was approved by a workers’ compensation judge, and Hernandez’s claim was dismissed with prejudice.

However, a year later, Hernandez filed another claim related to the same injury. His employer and insurer responded with a peremptory exception of res judicata, arguing that the matter had already been resolved. The court agreed and dismissed Hernandez’s second claim.

pexels-pixabay-263194-1024x683In a recent decision, the Louisiana Court of Appeal reversed a trial court judgment that had held Woman’s Hospital liable for a slip-and-fall accident. The case underscores the importance of understanding the “reasonable care” standard that applies to hospitals in such situations and how it can impact the outcome of personal injury claims.

Courtney Queen slipped and fell on a wet floor near the elevators at Woman’s Hospital. She sued the hospital, alleging negligence. The trial court initially favored Ms. Queen, awarding her damages for her injuries. However, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision.

The Legal Standard:

vidar-nordli-mathisen-ZZvsfoidr5g-unsplash-1024x729In a recent Louisiana Court of Appeal case, Schroeder v. Hanover Insurance Company, et al., the court delved into the complexities of slip-and-fall cases and the crucial role of adequate warnings in determining a business’s liability. This decision highlights the importance of understanding merchant liability laws in Louisiana and how the presence of warning signs can significantly impact a personal injury claim.

Sybil Schroeder slipped and fell in the restroom of a travel plaza, sustaining injuries. She sued the travel plaza and its insurer, claiming they were negligent in maintaining a safe environment. However, she admitted in her deposition that she had noticed two “wet floor” signs before entering the restroom.

The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the presence of these signs demonstrated they had exercised reasonable care. The trial court initially denied the motion, but the Court of Appeal reversed this decision.

pexels-pixabay-163007-1024x591A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit decision underscores the importance of the “continuing jurisdiction” principle in workers’ compensation cases. In this recent opinion, the court overturned a Workers’ Compensation Judge’s (WCJ) decision to dismiss a previously adjudicated claim, highlighting the specific procedures and legal framework that must be followed in such cases.

Mr. Green filed a workers’ compensation claim after suffering a work-related accident in 2008. The case went to trial in 2009, where certain facts were agreed upon, including Mr. Green’s entitlement to benefits and the employer’s liability for a penalty. The court determined Mr. Green’s average weekly wage and awarded him attorney fees and court costs. This ruling was finalized in a judgment on October 14, 2009.

In 2014, both parties agreed to stay the case until further motions were filed. However, no motions were filed, and the case remained stayed for over three years.

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-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-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.

Contact Information