Insurance Dispute Lawyer Blog
If you are involved with a lawsuit, you probably imagine your day in court involving a jury listening to the evidence and rendering a decision. After all, the US Constitution protects our right to a trial by jury. But what happens if the court issues a notice scheduling your trial to be heard in front of a judge instead of a jury?
Leigh Ann Schell and McGready Richeson (“Plaintiffs”) filed a lawsuit against Kuchler Polk Weiner LLC (“Kuchler”). Kuchler filed an answer and included a jury demand. Kuchler also paid the applicable filing fee. The trial court then held a pre-trial conference where it selected a trial date. At the conference, both parties’ attorneys and the trial judge signed a pre-trial notice that included the trial date for a trial to be held in front of a judge.
Later, Kuchler’s attorneys noticed the alleged error of setting the trial before a judge, not a jury. Kuchler filed a Motion to Continue, arguing it had not waived its right to a jury trial and had not authorized its attorneys to waive that right on its behalf. As evidence, Kuchler introduced an affidavit from its managing partner and authorized representative stating Kuchler had never authorized anyone to waive its right to a trial by jury. The trial court denied the motion, and Kuchler appealed.
If you’ve ever left a job in the middle of a pay period, you might have had to wait to receive your final check. But what if you were fired, reinstated, fired, reinstated, and fired again? Payment of wages gets a bit more confusing.
In the aftermath of a vehicle collision, the impact reverberates beyond the immediate parties involved, leaving a trail of injuries and legal complexities. Such was the case for Cody Johnson, a passenger on an RTA bus when it collided with another vehicle. Seeking full compensation for her damages, she pursued a vicarious liability claim against the driver’s employer. However, the court’s assessment of the driver’s scope of employment would determine the outcome of her pursuit of justice.
Have you ever witnessed an accident? The experience can be overwhelming, leaving lasting, often overlooked emotional scars. Such consequences raise an essential question; can a witness to an accident seek damages in court? The subsequent lawsuit helps answer that question. The journey of the litigants through the intricate legal landscape reveals their unwavering determination to find solace for the emotional anguish they endured as witnesses to the tragic events.
A personal injury claim requires following specific rules and procedures to ensure a fair and just resolution. For Joseph Barlow, who slipped and fell while detained at the Lafayette Correctional Facility, his failure to adhere to the correction center’s administrative remedies became critical. This article examines the consequences Barlow faced when he disregarded the proper procedures and highlights the significance of following the established protocols.
The separation of property between spouses is a legally recognized process, allowing them to transfer assets. However, what happens when this separation is done with fraudulent intent? In the case of Kathryn and Paul Holland, creditors accused the couple of fraudulently dividing their assets to avoid payment. The creditors filed a motion to intervene in the divorce proceedings, alleging that the Hollands knew about pending civil lawsuits against them. Despite their objections, the trial court granted the motion filed by Ms. Holland, prompting the creditors to appeal the decision. The following post summarizes the appeal. 
When pursuing a legal claim against an employer regarding adverse employment actions, it is crucial to grasp the necessary elements required for a successful case. Failure to establish all essential components can result in the dismissal of your claim. The following lawsuit examines the circumstances of Lori Rayborn, a nurse at a high school in Bossier Parish, who faced alleged retaliation after expressing concerns about the administration’s handling of a student’s health needs. Despite her efforts to seek legal redress, Rayborn’s claims were ultimately dismissed.
We have all heard that “good fences make good neighbors.” But what happens when there is a dispute about the boundary of two pieces of property? The following conflict between New Fellowship Baptist Church and the Beals, who found themselves at odds over the boundary of their adjoining properties, helps answer this question. The dispute raises questions about the concept of acquisitive prescription, the importance of possession, and the determination of boundaries. By carefully examining the trial and appellate court’s rulings, we gain insights into the legal principles and the significance of seeking professional advice in property-related conflicts.
The process of filing insurance claims can be time-consuming, demanding careful attention from all parties involved. In a recent ruling by the First Circuit Court of Appeal in Louisiana, the importance of timely and exhaustive pursuit of administrative remedies before seeking judicial review in insurance payment disputes was underscored. The case of Southern Framers of Louisiana, LLC (Southern Framers) sheds light on the consequences of premature legal action, emphasizing the need to explore alternative avenues, such as administrative proceedings, before resorting to the courts. Through an examination of Southern Framers’ dispute with a healthcare provider, this ruling serves as a valuable reminder for future litigants to exhaust administrative remedies diligently and consider the proper timing and procedures in pursuing legal recourse.
In a society built upon the principles of justice and fairness, few experiences can be as devastating as being wrongfully accused of a crime, subsequently arrested, and imprisoned for a wrongdoing one did not commit. The ramifications of such a traumatic ordeal can be profound, leaving individuals grappling with profound emotional, psychological, and even physical consequences. In the face of such injustice, victims must be allowed to seek justice and hold accountable those responsible for their unwarranted suffering.