Articles Posted in Pain And Suffering Claims

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.

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.

pexels-jonathanborba-3279197-683x1024Providing sufficient expert testimony can be crucial to prevailing a medical malpractice lawsuit. But what happens when the court determines that the expert testimony offered by a doctor on the plaintiff’s behalf is insufficient because the doctor does not specialize in the same field as the defendant? 

Steven Richardson began to experience excruciating lower back pain in August 2012 while visiting his daughter in Farmerville, Louisiana. Richardson was taken by ambulance to the emergency room at Christus Health Northern Louisiana Hospital (“Christus Health”). Richardson was treated by Dr. James W. Cotter, III, a specialist in emergency medicine.

Richardson told Dr. Cotter that he was experiencing severe lower back pain, had received a steroid injection from his son-in-law (an eye doctor), and had been taking prescription pain medication. Dr. Cotter ordered lab work for a complete blood count, and Dr. Mark Kraemer, who consulted on Richardson’s case, ordered an MRI. The blood test showed that Richardson had an elevated white blood cell count.

new_zealand_accident_insurance_0-1024x768If you are injured on the job, you might be entitled to compensation through the workers’ compensation system. What happens if your employer denies your claims for treatment recommended by your treating physicians? Can your employer be required to pay you penalties and fees?

Betty Citizen hurt her back while she was trying to move a bike while working at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart denied her physical therapy that her treating neurosurgeon recommended. She filed a 1009 Form, which the Medical Director denied for being untimely. Citizen then filed a 1008 Form, claiming she was entitled to receive attorney fees and penalties because Wal-Mart had arbitrarily and capriciously handled her claims. 

Once Wal-Mart formally denied her physical therapy, Citizen filed another 1009 Form. The Medical Director denied that request as well, finding there was no required documentation about the results of prior therapy. On the day of the hearing, Wal-Mart approved the recommended physical therapy. Therefore, the only issue was whether Wal-Mart had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying Citizen’s physical therapy. 

worker_masonry_concrete_stones-1024x691While involved in a legal dispute, there are strict timelines that must be followed, not only for filing an initial lawsuit, but also for filing any subsequent appeals. However, arguments can arise about what timeline applies to a certain factual situation. 

Angela Jackson was injured while working at Family Dollar. Jackson filed a claim against Family Dollar. The Office of Workers’ Compensation awarded her medical expenses, disability, and supplemental earnings benefits. It also awarded her attorney’s fees and penalties against Family Dollar. 

Family Dollar filed an appeal about a month and a half after the Office of Workers’ Compensation issued the judgment in Jackson’s favor. However, Family Dollar did not indicate if it was a devolutive or suspensive appeal. 

surgery_eye_health_operation-1-1024x681“Causation is an issue of fact.” “It is the test for determining the causal relationship between an accident and an ensuing injury.” D’Angelo v. Guarino. This definition was vital in the following case.

In this case, court records revealed that Dwayne Levine (Plaintiff) was involved in an accident in 2012 that required two surgeries to his right ankle: one to help stabilize it and the other to fuse his bones to his ankle. In early 2013, the Plaintiff was recovering and about to transition from a boot to a shoe, though he still reported faint pains. 

However, on July 26, 2013, before the Plaintiff’s six-month follow-up, he re-injured his right foot when he slammed on his car brake to avoid a road collision. Soon after the incident, the Plaintiff experienced pain and went to the hospital. There, he received a splint and medication. At his follow-up visit, he did physical therapy and was given more pain medication. When his pain continued, a CT scan revealed the sub-talar joint had not fused since his initial surgery. As a result, a revision surgery was done in October 2013 to fuse the joint and remove the metal implant. A skin graft procedure was also done to stop an infection and care for the injury. 

surgery_eye_health_operation-1024x681Undergoing a surgery is always a nerve-wracking experience. You want to be able to trust that your surgeon conducted and reviewed the appropriate pre-operative tests. Can a surgeon be held liable if he or she fails to review the results of the pre-operative tests before performing the surgery? 

Roger Burchfield was admitted to Willis-Knighton Medical Center to receive non-emergency surgery on his gallbladder. Before the surgery, Burchfield’s surgeon, Forrest Wright, ordered a chest x-ray and EKG. However, Wright did not review the results prior to performing the surgery. If Wright had reviewed the tests, he would have seen Burchfield had congestive heart failure and multiple other possible heart issues. Burchfield himself did not know he had these heart issues. 

The surgery was successful, and Burchfield went home. However, about a day later, Burchfield started experiencing swelling. He went to the emergency room and was admitted into the hospital. The hospital found Burchfield had suffered a heart infection, respiratory failure, heart failure, and other issues. He was put in a medically induced coma before undergoing a heart transplant. Although Burchfield recovered from the transplant, he was no longer able to work as a mechanic and requires medical care for the transplant for the rest of his life. 

Contact Information