Accidents

The Importance of Truthfulness in the Legal System and Its Effect on Case Outcomes

Published on: June 8, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

truth_newspaper_news_printed-scaled Honesty is always the best policy. This proverb rings especially true in the legal system, where truthfulness and transparency are vital to maintaining the legal process. Failure to tell the truth or even a mistake in remembering the facts can bring severe consequences, as Mark and Paulette Moore discovered after a car accident on Interstate 10 in Iberville Parish.

Russell Charles was driving his vehicle and pulling a flatbed trailer when a pick-up driven by Mark Moore suddenly rear-ended him. The pick-up was the property of Moore Leasing LLC, a company Mark and Paulette Moore, Mark’s wife, owned together and insured by State Farm.

About six months after the accident, Moore signed an affidavit stating he was not in the course of employment when the car accident occurred and that the State Farm policy was the only liability insurance available that would give Charles coverage for the injuries from the accident.

What Happens When Uninsured Motorists Coverage Is From A Different State Than Where the Accident Occurred?

Published on: June 6, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

georgia_state_coat_arms-scaled When a loved one dies in a car accident, dealing with insurance is likely the last thing on your mind. Unfortunately, insurance policies can be complicated, with many details and exceptions. If you do not fully understand your insurance coverage, you might find yourself in a difficult situation when seeking compensation from your insurance company. This is especially important when your vehicles and insurance policies cover multiple states.

Cesar Medina was involved in a car accident in Lafayette Parish, Louisiana, that unfortunately resulted in his death. His wife filed a lawsuit against the driver of the other car, its insurer, and Medina’s insurer. The car Medina was driving at the time of the accident was owned by someone who lived in Georgia.

Medina’s insurer filed a summary judgment motion, arguing Medina’s insurance policy did not cover uninsured/underinsured motorists as of the date of the accident. In addition, the insurer argued the car had a Georgia insurance policy, and the vehicle’s owner had signed a waiver rejecting uninsured motorist coverage. The insurer provided the waiver as evidence. Medina’s wife did not oppose the motion. The trial court found Georgia law governed and granted Medina’s insurer’s summary judgment motion and denied Medina’s wife’s request for a new trial. Medina’s wife then appealed.

How Genuine Issues of Material Facts Can Impact a Personal Injury Case

Published on: June 3, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

slip_heads_up_warning Personal injury cases are notorious for their intricate nature, often posing challenges in determining fault and establishing liability. Complications escalate further when discrepancies arise regarding the facts surrounding the incident. When blame is uncertain, and parties refuse to accept responsibility, the legal landscape becomes increasingly convoluted.

A recent Louisiana Court of Appeals case offered a detailed examination of an issue of material fact in determining fault in a personal injury lawsuit. By exploring the court’s decision and the supporting evidence, we gain insight into the complexities inherent in such cases and their implications on a motion for summary judgment.

James Palmisano fell at work due to the water in the hallway. Palmisano alleged that the water leaked from the men’s and women’s toilets. He filed a lawsuit for his injuries, claiming two plumbing companies, Prejean and Colville Plumbing & Irrigation, Inc., were called to fix the problem but didn’t.

The Importance of a Complete Record at Trial: Lessons from a Car Accident Case

Published on: May 26, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

courthouse_court_law_justice-scaled All relevant evidence in a case should be produced at trial. However, the evidence included in a complete record can be subjective. Thus, the parties to a lawsuit should rely on the court’s definition of what a complete medical record consists of.

Christina Dauzat (Dauzat) was involved in a car accident where she was rear-ended by Erin Wright (Wright). Dauzat filed a lawsuit, and a bench trial was held, which favored Dauzat and awarded damages of $17,741.51, with interest. Wright, State Farm, and Dauzat appealed the ruling.

At the beginning of the bench trial, Dauzat’s counsel introduced authorized exhibits: Exhibit D-1-6, which consisted of medical records from various hospitals. At trial, Dauzat introduced medical records and bills she believed were essential to the case, which was agreed upon at the pretrial conference. These records were classified as Exhibit P-4. State Farm had agreed to the authenticity of the bills. Therefore, the records, Exhibit P-4, were admitted into evidence. State Farm complained that Dauzat’s medical records did not contain the entire certified copies; consequently, they wanted to introduce full copies of Dauzat’s medical records. State Farm claimed Dauzat had personal bias as to which records she included.

Louisiana Court Affirms General Damages Awarded to Ascension Parish Woman Injured In Auto Accident

Published on: May 24, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

project_366_138_170512-scaled Although you may be excited if you are awarded damages at trial, your award might still face a challenge on appeal. Therefore, when you are involved in a trial for an accident in which you were harmed, it is important to understand what evidence you need to present so that any money you are awarded can survive a challenge on appeal.

While driving a Honda Accord in Ascension Parish, Louisiana, Juliet All was hit by a Chevrolet Silverado Austin Tynes was driving after he did not stop at a stop sign. As a result, All’s vehicle was knocked into a ditch. All received medical treatment at St. Elizabeth Hospital and was diagnosed with chest pain and neck strain. When her pain did not go away, she went to an orthopedic surgeon for treatment, who diagnosed her with whiplash and cervical spine injury, including injury to her soft tissue.

All filed a lawsuit against Tynes and Safeco Insurance Company, who insured him. The parties agreed that Tynes was solely responsible for the accident and had insurance coverage from Safeco when the accident occurred. They also stipulated that All’s damages would not exceed $50,000. At trial, All was awarded $66,000 in damages. This was reduced to $50,000 because of the parties’ stipulation. Safeco and Tynes appealed, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding All $50,000 in general damages because her injuries were minimal and of short duration.

HOW DOES A COURT DECIDE HOW MUCH FAULT A DRIVER HAS WHEN BOTH SIDES CAUSED AN ACCIDENT

Published on: May 20, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

accident_mini_morris_red-scaled Simple driving accidents happen every day due to lapses in inattention. The results of these lapses can have devastating consequences. Whose is at fault in an accident when both parties were less than perfect in assessments of dangers on the road? The subsequent lawsuit from Louisiana shows how a court will determine how much fault each party bears for an accident and adjust damages based on that outcome.

In 2014, Stephan August was out making a delivery for Domino’s Pizza in his own 2010 Toyota Corolla. He was heading West on Louisiana Highway 1040 in Tangipahoa Parish when Lee Kebreanne drove behind him in her 2001 Toyota Camry. According to Lee, August was varying his speed, giving her the impression that he did not know where he was going. As a result, Lee decided to pass him in the eastbound lane. Unfortunately, as she was in the eastbound lane, August also pulled into the eastbound, and the two drivers collided. Lee’s car flipped three times and ultimately landed upside down, and August hit his head on the driver’s side door.

August filed a lawsuit against Lee and her insurance companies, GoAuto and Progressive. A trial occurred where the District Court determined that Lee was 100% at fault and awarded August a total of $14,389.05 in damages. Lee appealed the decision citing that the court was wrong about her fault being 100% and that $12,500 in general damages were excessive.

Collateral Source Rule Does Not Preclude Lafayette Parish Accident Victim’s Recovery From Insurer

Published on: May 19, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

car_racing_crash_accident-scaled If you have ever been involved in an accident, you know it can be challenging to deal with multiple parties. From the other vehicle’s driver to numerous insurance companies, knowing who to contact can often seem impossible. This becomes even more difficult when navigating the workers’ compensation system.

Marcus Slaughter, who worked for Garda, and Ernest Howard, who worked for DABM, collided on a road in Lafayette Parish, Louisiana. Slaughter collided with Howard, suffered injuries, and received medical treatment. DABM’s workers’ compensation insurer paid for Howard’s medical expenses and workers’ compensation benefits while he could not work.

Howard then filed a lawsuit against Slaughter, Garda, and Garda’s auto insurer. Although the trial court awarded Howard lost wages and general damages, the judgment stated that it did not include the medical expenses of over $33,000. The trial court reasoned that DABM’s insurer had already paid these medical expenses, so Howard was not entitled to additional recovery. Howard appealed, arguing the court should have awarded him the medical costs.

Failure to Raise a Right Results in Waiver of Right and Defense in Car Crash Case

Published on: May 17, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

firefighter_cars_accident_hood-scaled Nobody likes insurance policies or divorce. Both can be extremely messy and full of legal jargon. Megan Daigle experienced this firsthand as her divorced parents’ insurance did not cover everything they hoped for.

In the fall of 2013, Megan Daigle was driving in Morgan City, Louisiana, when she did not stop at a stop sign. This failure to stop resulted in her vehicle, a car her father owns and provides to Megan for her sole use, colliding with a car driven by Monty Rivers. At the time of the accident, Megan was a minor. Megan’s mother had legal custody as her parents were divorced. Megan was insured under an Allstate policy held by her mother and stepfather. Mr. Rivers was injured in the accident and filed lawsuits against Megan, her father, her mother, and all connected insurance companies.

Allstate filed a motion for summary judgment and a partial summary judgment, arguing the policy did not provide coverage because a policyholder did not own Megan’s vehicle, and it was available for Megan’s regular use. The lower court granted this judgment. Rivers appealed the granting of Allstate’s motion arguing that Allstate waived their right to assert a coverage defense and that the allegations found in the pleadings were sufficient to put Allstate on notice of the potential coverage defense. Rivers’ argument was based on the understanding that upon receipt of the pleadings, Allstate had sufficient notice of the facts, which indicated the policy held by Megan’s mother did not provide coverage for Megan.

Sincerely or Not: Could You Be Liable for Bringing a Frivolous Appeal?

Published on: May 14, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

outback_australia_bush_road-scaled The legal system has neither time nor resources to waste, so courts refrain from entertaining frivolous lawsuits that lack serious or sincere claims. Moreover, in such cases where a court determines that a lawsuit is frivolous, the court will render a judgment against the party who brought the lawsuit and can also order that party to pay damages, including the other party’s attorney fees. For these reasons, it is critical to consult with an excellent attorney before such cases are brought before a court.

As for Marsha Willis (“Willis”), an unauthorized driver of her mother’s rental car, a Louisiana judge for the First Circuit Court of Appeals determined that although she had absolutely no evidence to support her legal claims, she sincerely believed in the positions she argued and therefore her appeal was not frivolous.

Willis’ mother entered into a rental agreement for a Toyota Corolla with the car rental agency, Enterprise. Shortly after, Willis was driving her mother’s rental car when she crashed into another driver. The other driver sued Willis for damages related to the accident. Then, a claim specialist for Empire Fire and Marine Insurance Company (“Empire”), the insurer for Enterprise, notified Willis that they denied her request for coverage in the accident and litigation with the other driver because she was not listed as an authorized driver on her mother’s rental agreement.

Allocating Damages in Wrongful Death Cases: Navigating the High Standard of JNOV Motion

Published on: May 13, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

courthouse_court_law_justice_0-1-scaled Allocating damages in a wrongful death case is challenging because putting a price on a life is hard. Therefore, if a family in a wrongful death case feels the jury abused its discretion in calculating that monetary value, then the family can resort to a motion for JNOV to try and correct the decision. However, this is a rigorous standard, and a recent case out of Baton Rouge outlines how a court reviews these motions.

Noha Salama was visiting family in Louisiana from her home in Israel. Her nephew picked her up from the airport in New Orleans, and the two drove down Interstate 10 toward Baton Rouge. The nephew exited the highway at Louisiana Highway 44/Burnside Drive in Gonzales and stopped at the stop sign at the end of the exit ramp. In an attempt to re-enter the interstate, the nephew drove the vehicle across the four-lane highway and failed to stop at the median, which divided the north and southbound lanes. Once the vehicle crossed over the median, it was broadsided by two cars going south. Salama, who was in the front passenger seat, died at the accident scene.

Salama’s husband and five children filed a wrongful death action against her nephew, his insurer, the drivers of the two southbound vehicles, their insurers, and the DOTD. The family settled with all of the defendants except for the DOTD, and their case against the DOTD proceeded to a jury trial. The family alleged the DOTD, which had control over the intersection, was at fault for the accident for treating the Highway 44 exit and entrance ramps as a single intersection rather than two separate intersections.