Insurance Dispute Lawyer Blog

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.

Appealing a Court Judgment in Louisiana: Why Decretal Language Matters

Published on: May 23, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

hammer_court_justice_book-scaled When you receive a final judgment from the trial court, you focus on the case’s outcome. However, if you want to appeal that judgment, it is essential to understand what language is needed in the final judgment to appeal it. If this language is not included, you might be in a situation similar to Marvin Beaulieu, whose appeal was dismissed.

Beaulieu had a membership at the Autocrat Social and Pleasure Club. His membership was terminated. After his membership was terminated, Beaulieu filed a lawsuit arguing that he suffered from a loss of reputation, fellowship, opportunity, business opportunities, emotional distress, and embarrassment as a result of his membership termination. The trial court issued a temporary restraining order valid for six days. In response, Autocrat Social and Pleasure Club filed papers arguing that there had been insufficient service and there was no cause or right of action in the lawsuit and moved to dissolve the lawsuit.

The trial court held a hearing, where it determined that Beaulieu was not entitled to damages and denied his request for an injunction. Beauliue appealed the denial of his request for an injunction under La. C.C.P. art. 3601.

Louisiana Court Settles Insurance Contract Dispute Following Deadly Explosion

Published on: May 22, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

news_stock_newspaper_glasses-scaled Insurance claims can be tricky, especially when multiple parties and contracts are involved. What happens, for example, when one insurance company claims they are not responsible for payment after a catastrophic event resulting in lost lives? The following Terrebonne Parish case follows this exact scenario.

An explosion at the Transco facility in Gibson, Louisiana, resulted in the death of four individuals, including two employees of Danos and Curole Marine Contractors, LLC (hereinafter referred to as “Danos”) and two employees of Furmanite America, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Furmanite”). The Danos employees were working under a request-for-service order issued by Transco under a General Service Agreement, and the Furmanite employees were working as a subcontractor to Danos under a request-for-service order under a Master Service Contract. Following the explosion, many lawsuits, including this one, were filed against Transco, Danos, and Furmanite.

Transco then filed a third-party demand against The Gray Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as “Gray”), maintaining that Gray must defend and indemnify Transco under a provision in an insurance contract issued to Danos for which Transco was named additionally insured under the General Service Agreement. Gray then filed multiple objections to Transco’s claim based on prematurity. The 32nd Judicial District Court for the Parish of Terrebonne then dismissed Transco’s claims. An appeal to the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal by Transco followed.

Louisiana Court Bars Recovery for NOPD Officer Who Tested Positive for Morphine on the Job

Published on: May 21, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

2015_ford_police_utility_0-scaled Random drug testing is common practice for certain jobs. What remedy does a police officer have when he takes a morphine pill for pain and is randomly selected for a drug test the following day when he comes into work?

Officer Mario Cole was randomly chosen to undergo a standard drug screening for his job at the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD). When he took the test, he tested positive for morphine. As a result, Cole was suspended pending investigation by the NOPD. Sergeant Lesia Latham Mims interviewed Cole and his fiancée as part of her investigation. Cole claimed he injured himself while lifting weights the day before. His fiancée gave him one of her prescription pills for his pain. Cole alleged he believed it was a regular pain reliever. The department next conducted a pre-disciplinary hearing. At the hearing, it was decided Cole’s employment would be terminated for violating NOPD rules against drug use. Cole appealed.

On his appeal, Cole argued the decision to terminate his employment was an abuse of discretion because: 1) the board found him to be under the influence of morphine when he came to work, 2) the board found there was a relationship between the violation and his ability to operate as a public servant, and 3) his termination was found to be the proper course of action for his offense.

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.

When Coworkers Attack: Negligence Claims for Intentional Workplace Injuries

Published on: May 18, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

farm_mountain_farm_meadow-scaled An employee injured at work while performing the functions of her job is generally entitled to worker’s compensation. But what about a worker injured on the job by the intentional act of a fellow employee? An action for recovery due to employer negligence could be a better option.

Louisiana worker’s compensation law does not provide coverage for employees injured during an incident unrelated to their workplace activities, for example, an altercation between co-workers arising out of personal issues. R.S. 23:1031E.

Instead, an employer may be liable for negligence if it had reason to believe its employee(s) could be attacked at work but failed to intervene. Posecai v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.. Courts will consider whether the employer had information suggesting an incident might occur and, if so, when it was received and what level of detail was available to help determine the appropriate response. See Carr.

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.

Is It Constitutional To Suspend Someone’s License For Repeat Arrests for DWI?

Published on: May 16, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

driving_car_automobile_driver-scaled Everyone knows it is a bad idea to drive under the influence of alcohol. However, even if you are in the unfortunate situation of being arrested for drinking and driving, you still have constitutional rights. Nonetheless, it is important to be aware of the possible penalties you could face, including having your driver’s license suspended. These consequences can become even more severe if you are a repeat offender.

David Carver was arrested multiple times for driving while intoxicated (“DWI”) under La. R.S. 14:98. The first time, he did not receive a conviction as he participated in a diversion program. He pled guilty to the DWI the second time and was placed on probation. Because Carver refused to take the test for intoxication, his driver’s license was suspended. Although Carver attempted to have his license reinstated, the State denied the restatement because he had refused to submit to the chemical test. La. R.S. 32:667 prohibits reinstating someone’s license who refuses to take the chemical test for a second or subsequent arrest, which occurred here.

The State later reinstated his license on the condition that he install an ignition interlock device. Carver filed a motion arguing that certain sections of La. R.S. 32:667 were unconstitutional. The district court held that sections (H)(3) and (I)(1)(a) of La. R.S. 32:667 were unconstitutional because they violated the Due Process Clauses found in the Constitutions of Louisiana and the United States. Specifically, these provisions provided punishments based upon a prior arrest, not on prior illegal conduct that had been proven. The State appealed.

Can An Undocumented Worker Receive Workers’ Compensation Benefits?

Published on: May 15, 2023 | By Berniard Law Firm

document_paper_former_war-scaled Navigating receiving workers’ compensation benefits following an on-the-job injury can be difficult. It is even more difficult when you are an undocumented worker. Unfortunately, that is the situation Candido Perdomo, an undocumented worker, found himself in after he was injured when he was pinned underneath a garbage truck when a road collapsed.

Perdomo filed a claim against RKC and its insurer after they reduced his workers’ compensation benefits following his injury. RKC agreed that Perdomo was injured in the scope of his employment. Although they agreed that his average wage was $630 per week at the time of the accident and his compensation was $420 per week, they claimed that he had a weekly earning capacity of $145 per week after the accident, with a compensation rate of $323.33. Therefore, they claimed they had the right to reduce Perdomo’s benefits under La. R.S. 23:1206.

This claim went to trial at the Office of Workers’ Compensation (“OWC”), who agreed with the Defendants that the reduction in Perdomo’s benefits to $323.33 was appropriate. The OWC noted that it was the Defendants’ burden to establish that Perdomo could physically perform a given job and that Perdomo had not met his burden of proof in showing that his injury caused his inability to work. The OWC also said that Perdomo could not rely on the fact he was undocumented as a reason he had not found work. Perdomo appealed.