by

car_accident_accident_dig-1024x775Have you ever been involved in a car accident? It’s a scary experience that can have serious consequences. If you’ve been injured in an accident, you may be entitled to compensation for your injuries and damages. But what happens when multiple parties are involved? That’s the question at the heart of a case out of Louisiana, where a car accident resulted in a lawsuit between multiple parties. The case raises important questions about the legal responsibility of parties in a car accident and the process for resolving disputes in court.

Shaw, a construction engineering company, allegedly had a labor agreement with HKA Power. The parties were bound by the Master Supplemental Labor Services Agreement (“Agreement”), which originally existed between HKA Power and Energy Delivery Services but was acquired by Shaw after the agreement was in place. According to Shaw, HKA Power was required to name Shaw/EDS as an additional named insured on their insurance policies once Shaw acquired EDS. The issue arose after a truck accident where Gregory Beasley, an HKA Power employee, was driving a truck owned by Shaw and rear-ended another truck driven by Justin Parker, injuring him and his passenger Gregory Gumpert.

Parker and Gumpert filed a lawsuit against Shaw, Zurich (Shaw’s alleged liability insurer), and Beasley. Zurich and Shaw then filed a third-party claim against HKA Power, alleging Beasley was an HKA Power employee and performed services for Shaw under the Agreement. HKA Enterprises, Inc. was later added as a third-party defendant, with Zurich and Shaw alleging HKA Enterprises was the parent company or successor entity to HKA Power and breached the labor agreement by not naming Shaw/EDS as an additional named insured.

Continue reading

by

traffic_lights_green_light-1024x678Cities need to ensure public utilities are safe and properly installed. Road fixtures, such as traffic lights and speed limit signs, are an essential part of infrastructure. When road fixtures are installed negligently, the public needs to be able to hold the liable parties accountable. 

So who should be responsible if a road sign crashes into your car or a utility pole falls on you? It depends, and proving why an entity is liable requires a skilled lawyer familiar with the use of experts. In the following case, a plaintiff is seeking to hold the City of Baton Rouge responsible for damage to his car caused by a falling traffic signal. The case shows why the proper use of expert testimony is critical to ensuring both sides get their day in court. 

Randolph Barnett was driving in East Baton Rouge Parish when a school zone sign hanging overhead suddenly fell and crashed onto his windshield. Barnett sued the City of Baton Rouge and the Parish of East Baton Rouge via the Department of Public Works. The trial court granted summary judgment for the City, thereby dismissing the case. Barnett appealed this decision for review by the appellate court. 

Continue reading

by

1980s_style_tow_truck-1024x768Personal injury cases can lead to placing the blame on a party so the injured person can receive compensation for her injuries. But what happens after a traffic miscommunication if both sides blame the other for the wreck? Further, what if their insurance companies are unwilling to take all the blame and pay for the accident?  The only way to solve this dilemma is through a trial which can help apportion the fault of each side after weighing the evidence. The following case out of Marksville, Louisiana, shows how fault should be apportioned in a personal injury car accident. 

David Sampson was driving down the highway with a passenger, Mario Jacobs, with a second truck attached by a tow rope. The towed truck was being operated by Sandalon Jacobs. Florence Decuir was traveling toward an intersection with the highway where Sampson was driving. Believing she saw Sampson’s turn signal, Decuir turned onto the highway to make more space for the trucks. Allegedly, Decuir did not stop at the stop sign, so Sampson had to hit his brakes, causing the towed truck to rear-end the truck he was driving. Decuir denied seeing the accident. 

Sandalon and Jacobs filed a lawsuit alleging personal injury due to the accident and named several defendants. However, by the time the bench trial came around, State Farm was the only defendant remaining. The trial court apportioned 95% of the fault to Decuir and only 5% to Sampson. The trial court determined Sandalon and Jacobs suffered from soft tissue injuries. Sandalon was awarded $46,500.00 in general damages and $5,397.81 in past medical expenses. Jacobs was awarded $35,200 in general damages and $7,377.73 in past medical expenses. State Farm appealed the trial court decision.

Continue reading

by

gavel_wood_courtroom_legal-1024x683After a lawsuit, a trial is when each side can articulate their case theories. Usually, the culmination of a trial is a judgment that can be appealed. However, there are other occasions where the court can discuss the judgments besides an appeal. An alternative to an appeal is the petition for nullity, which may further examine the case and the court’s decisions. What is a petition for nullity of judgment, and how can it be used to overturn a jury verdict? The following lawsuit, Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, answers this question.

Mr. Ezzell worked as a marine insurance adjuster until 2008 when he was punched in the head by Dr. Lucien Miranne in a bar. At the principal trial, Dr. Miranne was found liable for the injuries Ezzell suffered. Ezzell was awarded damages for past medical expenses, pain, and suffering, past lost wages, and two years of future lost earning capacity. 

The jury’s judgment was primarily based on testimony by Ezzell and his doctors that attested to his injuries and poor cognitive functioning. For example, one witness, Dr. Thomas, said his injuries would “make it difficult for him to return to the level of employment he had before. Dr. Miranne appealed this judgment arguing Ezzell was faking and exaggerating his injuries, the same argument made at trial. Rather than overturn the judgment, the appellate court awarded additional damages for future pain and suffering to Ezzell. 

Continue reading

by

highway_jam_baustelle_jam-1024x769As the weather gets nicer across the country, millions will travel to destinations near or far. Unfortunately, with this increase in traffic, accidents will occur due to the negligence of drivers. But what happens when the roadway’s integrity and safety come into question? Can the state be held liable for a highway’s defects? – The following lawsuit out of Morgan City, Louisiana, helps answer that question.

Mariah Schouest and Nicole Smith were good friends who lived and worked in Houma, Louisiana. They enjoyed going on long drives where they would listen to music and talk for fun. Typically, they would drive on Highway 90 toward New Orleans, but on this particular road trip, they decided to go West toward Morgan City. 

Schouest was driving while Smith was sitting in the passenger seat. Having been on the road for some time, Schouest stopped at the gas station on the left since it was getting dark. To get there, she slowed her vehicle, flicked on her turn signal, and began to turn into the median. Unfortunately, before she could turn, the car was hit from behind by a pickup truck driven by Joshua Landry. Smith sustained a severe brain injury as a result of the crash.

Continue reading

by

car_old_car_car-1024x683Driving while on the job can be a common occurrence for many employees. Sometimes you may even use your personal vehicle on a workplace errand. If so, beware; Accidents happen, and your employer’s insurance may not cover you. 

Kim Simon was struck by an uninsured motorist when driving her personal vehicle while doing her job. Simon’s vehicle was damaged, but her employer’s insurance would not pay to fix the damages. So Simon sued her employer’s insurance to get coverage for her personal vehicle. 

Her company’s insurance provider argued that Simon’s personal vehicle was not covered under the policy because it was not a “covered auto” defined by the policy. Simon argued that because the auto policy did not list any “covered autos.” Further, she felt Louisiana revised statute 22:1295(1)(e) required the insurance policy to cover her unlisted car. 

Continue reading

by

field_land-1024x768Aquisitive Prescription. It is a strange-sounding set of words, yet it can be vital in proving ownership of land and property in Louisiana. What exactly is it? The subsequent lawsuit helps answer that question and the following one: How can I prove ownership of land through acquisitive prescription in Louisiana?

Crystal and Gwendolyn Smith sued Raymond Felton, claiming they owned land in White Castle, Louisiana. The Smiths claimed Felton misrepresented that he owned the property, had entered the property without permission, and intentionally damaged the home located thereon. The Smiths sought injunctive relief prohibiting Felton from entering the property. The Smiths also sought damages for the damage to the property and the mental distress they suffered. 

In response, Felton argued he owned the land at issue. Although Felton did not have the actual title to the at-issue property, he provided a chain of titles dating back to 1897, whereas the Smiths only dated back to 1899. The trial court ruled in favor of Felton because he and his ancestors in title had been in possession of the at-issue property for over thirty years, which is required to establish ownership by acquisitive prescription. See La. C.C. art. 3486. The Smiths filed a motion for a new trial, which the trial court denied. They then appealed. 

Continue reading

by

bauer_elementary_asbestos_1-1024x768Although most people have heard of both state and federal courts, many do not know when a party in a lawsuit can move a case to a different court. This happened to Howard Zeringue, who first filed a lawsuit in Louisiana state court, but soon found himself in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana after the company he sued removed the case to federal court. This case helps answer the question; My lawsuit was removed to Federal Court. What does that Mean?

Zeringue sued Crane Company (“Crane”) and twenty others for the injuries they allegedly suffered from asbestos exposure.  Zeringue claimed he was exposed to asbestos while working for the United States Navy and at two other jobs. Additionally, Zeringue claimed Crane designed and supplied products with asbestos to the sites where he worked and was exposed to asbestos. 

Although Zeringue initially filed the case in state court, Crane removed the case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). Crane argued any product Crane allegedly manufactured and provided to the Navy would be subject to the Navy’s discretion on whether to use asbestos and whether to include a warning on the product. Zeringue filed a motion to remand the case back to state court. The district court ruled in his favor, holding Crane had not shown the government had exercised its discretion concerning the design and warning problems at issue.  Crane appealed the district court’s ruling that sent the case back to state court. 

Continue reading

by

larimer_sheriff_reserve-1024x683This scenario is not hard to imagine: you are driving along the road, and you get into an accident; however, the other vehicle is not just a regular car owned by a private citizen, but it is a dump truck owned by the local government. When suing a local governmental entity such as a sanitation department or police station, the injured party may face obstacles in naming precise owners of public vehicles or following procedural rules. A recent case out of St. Charles Parish demonstrates what kinds of procedural obstacles a plaintiff may face. It also helps answer the question; what happens if I name the wrong defendant in a lawsuit? Is my case over?

On January 13, 2010, three prisoners in the custody of the St. Charles Parish Sheriffs were being transported in a vehicle owned by the Sheriff’s office when it collided with a dump truck. As a result of the accident, the three alleged they had suffered “severe and grievous injury to body and mind.” On January 12, 2011, they filed a lawsuit against the Parish of St. Charles as the owner of the dump truck, the driver of the dump truck, and its liability insurer. Then the plaintiffs added the Parish of St. Charles Sheriff’s Office as the owner of the prisoner transportation vehicle and the employer of the dump truck driver. 

After discovery, St. Charles Parish filed for a motion of summary judgment, asking the court to decide the case in their favor because the allegations were legally insufficient because the Parish did not own the dump truck. In support of its motion, the Parish attached a Certificate of Ownership, demonstrating the St. Charles Parish Sheriff’s office owned the dump truck. The trial judge granted the motion. Subsequently, Greg Champagne, the Sheriff of St. Charles Parish, filed exceptions of prescription, which essentially asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit because the plaintiff did not file the case on time or failed to follow procedural rules. The court also granted the exceptions of prescription, and the plaintiffs appealed.   

Continue reading

by

door_front_door_input-1024x768Some doors, such as bathroom doors, are heavy and have quick automatic closing mechanisms attached. If a door of that nature hits you in the back on your way and knocks you down, who is liable? The following case out of New Orleans shows how courts deal with door-closing mechanisms and trip-and-fall lawsuits. 

In 2011, Gail Encalade visited her insurance agent’s office in an office building on General DeGaulle. Before leaving, she pushed the restroom door open without issue and entered the bathroom. When exiting, she pulled the restroom door, and the door began to close behind her. As it was closing, she alleged it hit her on the back, causing her to fall forward, sustaining injuries to her shoulder and face.

In April of 2012, Encalade sued for damages, America First Insurance Company (AFIC) and other defendants were negligent in failing to maintain safe public areas, that being the restroom specifically. She argued the AFIC should have known of the problems with the doorways and the door equipment. AFIC answered the lawsuit by filing a motion for summary judgment. 

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