by

Under Louisiana law, store owners are required to exercise reasonable care to keep their stores free from conditions that could be hazardous to customers and visitors. When a customer is injured while browsing the aisles, the merchant’s efforts to maintain a safe premises are often given great scrutiny. To win a negligence suit against a merchant for an injury that was due to an unsafe condition of the premises, the customer is required to prove the following three elements: (1) the condition presented an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of harm to the customer; (2) the merchant either created or had notice of the unsafe condition; and (3) the merchant failed to exercise reasonable care to remedy the condition.

On the element of notice, the customer/plaintiff has two options. She can show “actual notice,” which requires her to prove that the merchant had specific knowledge of the dangerous condition (usually occurring when the condition had been previously reported to a store employee). Alternatively, the plaintiff can rely on “constructive notice” if she can show that the condition existed for such a period of time that it would have been discovered if the merchant had exercised reasonable care (normally proven by showing that the store failed to regularly clean/go through the store looking for problems).

The analysis of the constructive notice issue was of central importance in the case of Gregory v. Brookshire Grocery Co., No. 45,070 (Ct. of App. La., 2d Cir., 2010). On October 21, 2003, Lena Gregory entered the Brookshire Grocery Store in Farmerville. Just prior to her arrival, a young girl had become ill and vomited in several places around the store as she attempted to find the restroom. Gregory noticed the vomit on the floor near the entrance to the store and carefully made her way around it. Approximately 15 minutes later, as Brookshire employees cleaned up in other areas of the store, Gregory slipped and fell on a spot of a “clear substance about the size of a baseball.” It was unknown what the substance was, whether it was related to the girl’s sickness, how it got on the floor, or how long it had been there.

Continue reading

by

If you have slipped and fallen in a Louisiana store, you may not realize you are not alone. What’s more, you might not understand that you may have the legal rights to make a claim against the store for the incident. Just recently a lawsuit was filed in western Louisiana by a customer of a store who injured herself on the premise. These types of cases are classically known as “slip and fall” case. The victim in this case, Leona Jordan, was shopping at Walmart when she slipped on water that had accumulated on the floor and fell. Jordan was injured and hurt her hip, back, knee, and leg.

These types of accidents are far from rare. In fact, earlier this month Ellen Hickman injured herself at a Louisiana Dollar General store. She slipped and fell on a small plastic toy. As a result of the accident, she hurt her lower back, back of her head, ankle, and right leg.

If you have had a similar experience, you should know that Louisiana has laws in place to protect you.

Continue reading

by

A recent Louisiana Court of Appeals decision does a good job of explaining the elements of a medical malpractice claim and some pitfalls that might be encountered along the way.

In this case, Jessica Parker of Beau Bridge filed a suit against University Medical Center after she underwent two gall bladder surgeries at the Lafayette hospital in 2002 and 2003. The first surgery was for the removal of Parker’s gall bladder and stones in her common bile duct in November of 2002. In January of 2003 she returned to the hospital complaining of four days of flank pain, nausea, vomiting, and a “foreign body” around the incision site. She was admitted and a second surgery was performed to remove several small stones.

As required by Louisiana law before a medical malpractice case can be filed, Parker requested the formation of a medical review panel, complaining her surgery was botched and two metal clips were left inside her bile duct and caused an obstruction. In June 2005 the panel entered an opinion in favor of the hospital finding the appropriate standard of care was not breached. Following the unfavorable panel decision, Parker filed a lawsuit. The hospital moved for summary judgment and argued that because of the panel opinion and the fact that Parker did not use an expert witness to prove the applicable standard of care and breach there was no issue of material fact as to whether they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition, Parker submitted uncertified and incomplete copies of her medical records. Following a hearing the motion for summary judgment was denied but the court instructed Parker that if no evidence was submitted they would dismiss the case. Parker did not appear at a re-hearing in September 2009 and her claims were dismissed and the hospital’s motion was granted. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court decision.

Continue reading

by

Despite BP’s best efforts, clean-up volunteers will be able to file legal claims against the oil company if they arise. BP tried to force volunteer responders to promise they will not file claims but a federal judge has determined that will not be allowed. George Barisich, President of the United Commercial Fisherman’s Association in Louisiana asked for an emergency restraining order against BP, comparing the request to:

Demanding that a person running into their own burning home sign a release limiting or giving up their claims against the arsonist who caused the fire…At best it is an ill-conceived approach to the crisis at hand and has the unforeseen consequences of causing further–and irreparable–injury to the citizens of Louisiana. At worse, it is a dastardly effort to compromise the rights of those citizens when they are the most vulnerable.

U.S. District Judge Helen G. Berrigan agreed with Barisich and granted the restraining order, finding that the agreements are unconscionable and that any agreements that had already been signed are null and void.

Continue reading

by

Louisiana’s Supreme Court, in an April 2007 opinion, expounded on the vast discretion an appellate court is to give to a jury’s verdict on review.

From December 2000 to January 2001, Thurman and Rosemary Kaiser, a married couple in their mid-70s, were involved in three auto accidents – one in Jefferson Parish and two in Orleans Parish. Claims the couple may have had regarding the first and third accidents were settled out of court. However, regarding the second accident, which occurred on January 15, 2001, when the couple’s vehicle was rear-ended by Harry Hardin, the couple filed suit. Prior to trial, Hardin stipulated to liability. He later testified that his vehicle hydroplaned into the back of the plaintiffs’ vehicle, causing the accident. The case proceeded to a jury trial on the issue of damages.

After testimony from plaintiffs and defendant, Dr. Donald French, an orthopedic surgeon who treated both of the Kaisers, Paul Van Hoose, a claim representative of State Farm, Dr. Wendy Jamison, a neurologist who treated Mrs. Kaiser, and Dr. Jeffrey Sketchler, an orthopedic surgeon who treated both of the Kaisers, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding Mr. Kaiser $6,500 in total damages, including damages for past and future medical expenses as well as general damages, and awarding Mrs. Kaiser $20,000 in total damages for past and future medical expenses as well as general damages.

Continue reading

by

The roadways are a dangerous place for any individual, regardless if they are driving or merely a pedestrian. Because of environmental dangers as well as a wide variety of mechanical and human errors that can occur as cars drive across this country, it is important to understand the complexities of the law. Accidents involving pedestrians and cars happen all too often and the law does not entirely back the pedestrian in all incidences.

According to the St. Mary and Franklin Banner-Tribune, a pedestrian was struck and killed by an automobile on Saturday April 10th while walking along the U.S. 90 Service Road in western St. Mary Parish. The pedestrian was Danny Gautreaux, 52, of Patterson. Mr. Gautreaux was walking eastward on the westbound lanes of the U.S. 90 at Penn Road around 9 p.m. when he was struck by a 68 year-old woman driving a 2001 Ford Taurus. Louisiana State Police spokesperson Stephen Hammons took the occasion to remind pedestrians that Louisiana state law demands that they walk on sidewalks where sidewalks are provided. When there is no sidewalk, pedestrians are expected to walk on the shoulder of the road against the flow of traffic. Gautreaux was walking in the traffic lane when he was struck. He was pronounced dead at the scene by the St. Mary Parish Coroner. A press release reveals that Gautreaux was believed to be walking from his vehicle which had run out of gas near the site of the crash.

Pedestrians should note that they do not always have the right of way. Under Louisiana law (R.S. 32:211) pedestrians have the right of way in crosswalks whether traffic-control signals are in operation or in place or not. Vehicles are expected to slow down or stop to yield to a pedestrian within a crosswalk but the law also provides that it is unlawful for pedestrians to “walk along and upon an adjacent roadway” where sidewalks are available (R.S.32:215). Where there are no sidewalks, pedestrians walking along a highway are expected to walk only on the left side of the roadway or its shoulder facing approaching traffic. Even if a vehicle happens to break down or run out of gas, pedestrians should not engage in soliciting rides or help by standing in the roadway. (See R.S. 32:216).

Continue reading

by

According to an AP report, BP yesterday admitted that more oil than it originally estimated is leaking into the Gulf. This news, coming roughly one month after the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded and sank, is heightening Gulf Coast residents’ worries about the amount of damage likely to occur. A spokesman for BP, Mark Proegler, said that efforts over the weekend to insert a tube into the leaking pipe were successful, and that the tube is now siphoning off 210,000 gallons of oil per day. That figure is more than the total amount of oil BP and the U.S. Coast Guard originally estimated was leaking from the well, and it is clear that the tube is not capturing all the escaping oil. Mr. Proegler declined to estimate how much oil is still spewing into the Gulf, but some scientists who have viewed the underwater videos of the leak have suggested it could be as much as ten times the official estimate.

Meanwhile, crude oil began washing into the marshes on the state’s southeastern tip and the Breton National Wildlife Refuge, where scientists believe oil has killed some rare birds that reside there. “This is the heavy oil that everyone’s been fearing that is here now,” Gov. Bobby Jindal said during a boat tour of the wetlands. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as of May 17, 29 miles of Louisiana’s coastline had already seen oil.

Adding to concerns over BP’s handling of the disaster are reports of the company’s efforts to limit the public’s view of fouled beaches in Louisiana. CBS news reports when journalists attempted on Tuesday to visit an oil-covered beach in South Pass, they were turned away by BP contractors and two U.S. Coast Guard officers aboard a boat. The officers threatened to arrest the reporters, even though the government had not closed the beach to the public. The reporters captured video of one of the officers saying, “This is [sic] BP’s rules, not ours.”

Continue reading

by

While a plaintiff may have the best case possible, things do not always work out the way they should. Lawsuits don’t just fail on their merits. Sometimes not following procedural deadlines or simply not taking action at all can spell doom as well. In an April 2010 decision, the First Circuit Louisiana Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of Shirley W. Fleischmann of Baton Rouge’s claim against Keith Henderson and his insurance company. They did this because three years had gone by with no action taken to move the claim forward, thus bringing into play the Louisiana Abandonment Statute.

The claim arose when Henderson’s car (driven by Jennifer Parker) struck and killed Thomas E. Fleischmann while he was walking along the roadway. Ms. Fleischmann was the victim’s widow and included Henderson and his insurance company as parties in her wrongful death lawsuit filed in April 2002. The State of Louisiana (Department of Transportation) was named as a party as well but was dismissed in 2005 because effective request for service was not made within 90 days of commencement of the action.

In September 2008 Ms. Fleischmann filed a motion for a status conference to declare she intended to move forward against Henderson and his insurance company. In December of that year both parties filed a motion and order to be dismissed from the lawsuit as well because pursuant to LSA-C.C.P. art. 561 no action had been taken for three years. The trial court granted the order. Ms. Fleischmann filed a Motion to Reconsider the Ruling and the matter was heard in court in February 2009. The district court affirmed the dismissal and Ms. Fleischmann appealed claiming that the hearing previously held on the Department of Transportation’s Motion to Dismiss was a step in the prosecution or defense that interrupted tolling on the abandonment of her lawsuit against the other defendants. The Court of Appeals disagreed.

Continue reading

by

The Louisiana Court of Appeals’ 1979 ruling in Thompson v. Iberville Parish School Board provides insight into what factors should be considered when asking if a teacher has inappropriately punished a student. This decision reversed a previous ruling in favor of an Iberville Parish elementary school student and found in favor of the school and teacher.

12 year old Bryan Wilson was in a music class at St. Gabriel Elementary school when his teacher extended his leg and pushed him with his foot in the right buttock. The teacher claimed that it was the easiest way to get the unruly student’s attention and that he had been reprimanded previously to turn around and pay attention to no avail. Bryan on the other hand, claimed the kick was extremely hard, causing him to cry out in pain and even miss several days of school. The trial court found in Bryan’s favor and awarded his mother $500 on his behalf for pain and embarrassment suffered. They found that although corporal punishment was acceptable under Louisiana law (and teachers were provided with limited liability from civil suit), the choice of action went beyond what was considered reasonable. To the trial court, the use of a foot for corporal punishment was unreasonable no matter how much force was involved.

The Court of Appeals disagreed, however, and reversed the judgment, pointing to the lack of evidence of any serious injury. Bryan was examined by the school principal and a doctor that same day and there was no visible evidence of injury, nor did any abnormality appear on an x-ray. In addition, evidence had been presented at trial that Bryan was a normal, healthy child who did have a tendency to act up at school. The Court of Appeals found that although there were few situations where a kick, no matter how light, would be reasonable, this was one and that the teacher merely acted to get Bryan’s attention, not inflict pain.

Continue reading

by

In the face of the looming oil slick many estuaries and fishing grounds are being closed, leaving hundreds of Louisiana fishermen out of work. As the oil pours into the Gulf, many fishermen are wondering what’s next. While many questions are still up in the air there are a number of issues that fishermen need to be aware of.

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990

The Oil Pollution Act is a federal law that, among other things, allows an affected fisherman to file a claim against BP for his lost profits caused by the oil spill in addition to any other claims he has (i.e. property damage).

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