Published on: | By

crash_test_collision_60_1-scaledOne of the joys of adulthood is figuring out insurance coverage for your vehicles. Selecting the right coverage can be incredibly challenging when you own a small business because there are unclear lines between personal and company vehicles. This can be especially challenging if an accident occurs when driving a different vehicle than you usually drive. Can your insurance policy cover you when driving a different vehicle because your regular vehicle is out of commission and needs repairs? The subsequent lawsuit helps answer this question.

Gerald Arceneaux owned Gerald’s Towing. Axis Plus Insurance sold him an insurance policy for the garage that included uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. On the first day, the policy was in effect, Arceneaux got in a car accident in his Ford F250 while driving home from work. He claimed he was “on call” when the accident occurred, and his truck included tools and equipment sufficient to respond to service requests made to his towing company. He said he drove the Ford F250 when the accident occurred because the Ford F450 that Gerald’s Towing owned needed to be repaired. 

Axis filed a summary judgment motion, arguing the insurance policy did not provide uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage to Arceneaux for the claim under La. R.S.22:1295. Axis argued they didn’t cover the accident because it was Arcenaux’s personal vehicle, and he was not on call for Gerald’s Towing. The trial court granted Axis’s summary judgment motion. Arceneaux appealed. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

school_school_bus_bus-scaledSchool field trips are supposed to be fun. However, after an unfortunate incident, Darius Baheth’s experience was less than idyllic. Can a parent recover when their child is injured on a school field trip? The following lawsuit, out of Lafayette, Louisiana, answers that question.

When Darius was thirteen years old, he was allegedly injured while attending a school field trip to a movie theater in Lafayette, Louisiana. Darius had an Individualized Education Plan (“IEP”) because he had autism. While the teachers and students were leaving the bus to go across the street to the movie theater, Darius started running around. Some teachers placed restraints on him to prevent him from hurting himself or others. He then received medication and was able to participate in the field trip. 

His mother, Dorothy Baheth, filed a lawsuit against the Lafayette Parish School Board for the injuries Darius purportedly suffered on the field trip. She argued the injuries happened when the teachers placed restraining gear on Darius. She also claimed the teachers did not timely administer Darius’ medication. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

meat_barbecue_grill-scaledWhen preparing for a fundraiser, you understandably have lots on your mind. You have to coordinate food, RSVPs, and plan the event. However, if you are using something potentially dangerous, such as a propane barbecue, you also need to ensure you take reasonable steps to inspect it for any potential defects. Otherwise, you could be liable for injuries you or others suffer.

John Palir III was a pastor at Topsy United Pentecostal Church. A week before the church’s barbecue fundraiser, he and a deacon at the church were trying to light the barbecue pit on a barbecue trailer the church owned. When the deacon pressed the pilot button, Palir lit it with a lighter wand. That resulted in a ball of fire that blew Palir out of the trailer, where he hit the deacon’s grandson, who was standing nearby at the time of the explosion. Palir filed a lawsuit against the church and its insurer, GuideOne Insurance Company. 

At trial, Palir moved to exclude any instruction to the jury about him being liable for the explosion. The trial court allowed the church to present evidence of Palir’s negligence but not about whether Palir knew or should have known the barbecue trailer was defective or hazardous under La. C.C. art. 2317.1. At trial, the jury held Palir was 50% at fault, and the church was also 50% at fault. The jury also found the barbecue trailer was in the Church’s custody, it presented an unreasonable risk of harm to Palir, and the church knew or should have known about its defect. Palir appealed, arguing the jury erred in assigning him 50% of the fault. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

extrication_accident_rescue_421161-scaledWhat happens if you were previously injured in an incident and later involved in another accident that causes further injury? Can the person responsible for the second injury be liable for your injuries? Although pre-existing injuries can make it more complicated to determine the scope of your injuries, the court will still consider the extent to which the second accident caused additional injuries and affected your life.

Shermain Montiel Vaughn was driving a truck for Oakley Trucking, his employer. Vaughn hit the front of Jenella Ben’s car while attempting to turn left on a street in Lafayette, Louisiana. At the time of the accident, Rickie Hairston was riding in Ben’s car. Vaughn was 100% at fault for the accident and was in the scope and course of his job with Oakley Trucking when the accident occurred. Hairston filed a lawsuit, and the trial court ruled in his favor. The trial court awarded him $195,000 for general damages and $60,683 for special damages, including $240 of lost wages. Vaughn filed an appeal based partly on the assertion Hairston’s credibility was suspect given his prior injury and the facts surrounding which accident caused the injuries he complained of. 

Vaughn argued the trial court erred in not discrediting Hairston’s testimony after he was impeached at trial. He claimed Hairston hurt his knee from an incident unrelated to the car accident. He also argued Hairston was not credible because he acknowledged he did not tell his doctors about his prior injury. However, an appellate court defers to the trial court’s credibility determination because it is better positioned as it can examine a witness’s demeanor and the nuances of their testimony. See Lopez v. Lopez. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

hospital_nurse_patient_child-scaledWhen 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.

Rayborn worked as a nurse at a High School in the School System in Bossier Parish.  A diabetic student at the school, RNM, committed suicide due to her classmates’ bullying. Rayborn said she had recommended RNM receive special accommodation, but the student said she did not want to be profiled in the yearbook as having a disability. About a week before RNM’s death, Rayborn treated the student for high glucose levels. 

After RNM’s death, the parents filed a lawsuit against the Bossier Parish School Board. As part of the lawsuit, Rayborn’s notes related to her treatment of RNM were subpoenaed. Rayborn’s supervisors met with her to talk about the notes. Rayborn expressed concerns about how the school dealt with RNM’s health needs. Rayborn claimed after the meeting, her bosses treated her differently. There were later medical incidents at the school Rayborn was not informed about until after 911 was called. Rayborn was subsequently transferred to another school. She filed two grievances, but the Board took no action. Rayborn eventually resigned. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

church_interior_0-scaledWe 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.

New Fellowship Baptist Church, located in Delhi, Louisiana, was established in 1919. Florenda and Kathy Beals purchased property located adjacent to the church. The Beals sent the church a notice of trespass warning and told the church it needed to remove its structures and other movable items on its property. 

Under La. C.C. art. 3486, a person can acquire property, even without title or possession in good faith, by prescription of 30 years.  At trial, multiple witnesses had testified that New Fellowship had had a choir stand in the location for at least 30 years. Other witnesses testified about maintenance services the church had provided and New Fellowship’s indoor plumbing. The trial court ruled in favor of New Fellowship and dismissed the Beals’ trespass claims. 

Continue reading

Published on: | By

insurance_damage_repair_checklist-scaledThe 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.

After Rafael Diaz (Mr. Diaz) injured his shoulder during the scope of his employment with Southern Framers, he underwent rotator cuff surgery which Dr. Richard Texada performed at Doctor’s Hospital of Slidell d/b/a Sterling Surgical Hospital (Hospital). Following Mr. Diaz’s surgery, the Hospital sent a bill for $33,133.41 to Southern Framers’ insurance carrier Louisiana Homebuilders Association-Self Insured Fund (Carrier). On behalf of Southern Framers, the Carrier paid $8,887.80 to the Hospital, indicating what they believed was a “reasonable reimbursement for services” in Mr. Diaz’s surgery. As a result, the Hospital filed an administrative review according to their rights within Louisiana Administrative Code Title 40, pt. I, § 5149 (Title 40), for this underpayment of the Hospital’s services.

Neither Southern Framers nor the Carrier responded to the administrative review. Instead, they filed a “Disputed Claim for Compensation” with the Office of Workers’ Compensation (OWC), stating that the unpaid portion of the original $33,133.41 bill was unreasonable. Southern Framers took this claim further, alleging that even the $8,887.80 previously paid to the Hospital by the Carrier was an overpayment and demanded reimbursement. The Hospital responded to the OWC complaint, raising multiple objections, including prematurity, and disputing the claims for reimbursement. At the hearing, the OWC judge sustained the Hospital’s prematurity objection, finding that Southern Framers and the Carrier failed to follow the administrative remedies of Title 40. The OWC judge called this claim “an attempt to circumvent the procedure that’s supposed to streamline and make the payments go quicker and faster without going through the hearing process.”

Continue reading

Published on: | By

prison_cell_slammer_prison-scaledIn 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. 

This article delves into the harrowing reality of false arrest and wrongful imprisonment, highlighting the importance of legal recourse and the pivotal role of experienced attorneys in navigating the complex legal landscape to secure redress and restore the shattered lives of the innocent.

On May 4, 2015, Marlon Eaglin and Paul Powell were falsely accused of participating in an alleged shooting by two other suspects and were then arrested on attempted murder charges. The two were held in prison until August 21, 2015. On April 29, 2016, Eaglin filed a lawsuit seeking damages against the Eunice Police Department, the Chief of Police, Chief Randy Fontenot, and the City of Eunice, claiming he was falsely arrested and imprisoned by Eunice Police.

Continue reading

Published on: | By

oil_oil_production_oil-scaledSafeguarding your property rights is of utmost importance, as the consequences of inadequate protection can be far-reaching. While oil and gas rights disputes may not directly affect the average citizen, other property-related conflicts can significantly impact individuals and their assets. In such complex situations, navigating the intricacies of property laws requires the expertise of an experienced attorney who can empower you with a clear understanding of your rights, ensure the legal protections you are entitled to, and advocate on your behalf. The following lawsuit shows the importance of expert counsel in understanding your property rights. 

In 2011, a dispute arose over a large drilling unit’s oil and gas rights. Chesapeake Operating (“Chesapeake”) was the unit’s appointed operator and a lessee of mineral interests for a portion of the unit. TDX Energy (“TDX”) was also a lessee for a part of the unit. The unit’s drilling began in February 2011 and ended in July 2011. TDX’s leases to its oil and gas interests had not been recorded until after the drilling had been completed in September 2011. 

Later in 2011, TDX made Chesapeake aware of its leases and requested accounting reports, as required under Louisiana’s Title 30, section 103.1. After six weeks, having yet to receive a response, TDX again notified Chesapeake of how it had failed to comply with the law. Chesapeake eventually responded with a letter to TDX, requesting TDX decide whether it would participate in the unit well’s risk under section 10(A) of the statute. TDX responded by disagreeing, stating it was not required by law to opt-in or out and that Chesapeake did not provide the accounting reports; it forfeited its rights to contribution to drilling costs.

Continue reading

Published on: | By

tractor_red_tractor_red-scaledWhen an item is repaired, it is reasonable to expect it to be safe and free of defects upon its return. However, when an injury occurs after a product’s repair, the injured party is entitled to seek damages. For example, Joe McPherson suffered a knee injury after the battery compartment of a tractor, which Ronald Dauzat repaired, fell apart. The question of negligence and responsibility arose, leading to a legal dispute and subsequent appeal.

Dauzat sold his old tractor to McPherson. However, it did not function properly, so Dauzat took it in for repairs. Dauzat notified McPherson the tractor was ready to be picked up. When McPherson arrived at the shop, Dauzat was not there. But two men he assumed were employees permitted him to mount and inspect the tractor. When McPherson tried to demount, the battery compartment fell apart, and he fell and wounded his knee

McPherson filed a lawsuit against Dauzat for his injury. His complaint alleged the defective tractor caused his injuries. He stated that his injury would have been prevented if the battery box had been firmly latched. Dauzat filed an involuntary dismissal and claimed McPherson failed to present evidence that the unlatched box was the cause of his fall. 

Continue reading
Contact Information
1140 St Charles Ave
New Orleans, LA 70130
Phone: (504) 521-6000Fax: (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 © 2025, Berniard Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design