Articles Posted in Car Accident

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

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

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

texas_flag_texas_flag-1024x683Have you ever been involved in a car accident that potentially involved two states and wondered which state’s laws would govern your personal injury lawsuit? Say, you have an insurance policy issued in Texas, and you get into a car wreck in Louisiana. Which state’s laws will apply if you file a lawsuit related to the accident? The following case shows how Louisiana Courts use a choice of law analysis to determine what state laws should apply in these situations. 

Rafael Garces-Rodriguez and Julio Alonso (Rafels) were involved in a car accident when another motorist struck their car from behind. At the time of the accident, they were insured by Progressive County Mutual Insurance Company. Two years after the accident, Rafels filed a lawsuit against Progressive seeking compensation for their injuries and other damages sustained during the car accident. Progressive filed a motion with the court seeking dismissal of the case, asserting that Rafels rejected uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage (UM coverage). 

Progressive argued that Texas law should apply in the case because the policies were issued in Texas. Under Texas law, rejection for UM coverage is required to be in writing. However, there are no other special procedures or particular language that needs to be used for the writing. See: Ortiz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 955 S.W.2d 353 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1997, pet. denied). A satisfactory rejection in Texas requires minimal effort by the insured. 

Continue reading

by

u_s_customhouse_in-1024x768Filing for bankruptcy can be an overwhelming experience. Many disclosures must be made, and failing to do so can have severe consequences for other legal matters. For example, what happens if you are involved in a personal injury lawsuit after filing bankruptcy? Must you disclose that claim to a bankruptcy court? The following lawsuit out of Louisiana answers that question and shows the consequences that can flow from the failure to disclose. 

Helen and Robert Allen (HA) filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2009. In the five years, the court administered the HAs’ bankruptcy case, the HAs amended their case three times—one year after filing their initial bankruptcy case but before the three amendments. In 2010, Helen filed a personal injury lawsuit that alleged she was seriously and permanently injured when the stool she sat on broke apart. 

The defendants in her personal injury case filed a motion for a summary judgment seeking to dismiss Helen’s lawsuit because they contended that HAs didn’t disclose the existence of the filing in their bankruptcy. Moreover, they argued the court should prevent HAs’ personal injury claim from proceeding based on judicial estoppel because HAs did not disclose the lawsuit to the bankruptcy court. 

Continue reading

by

money_change_penny_quarter-1024x962Calculating appropriate damages for a plaintiff who experiences ongoing injuries from a vehicle accident is complex. Jury awards generally are left undisturbed by appellate courts. The following lawsuit shows how the appeals process can alter a jury’s award for mental and physical pain and suffering. 

On October 1, 2009, Patricia Aguillard was driving on the interstate when she slowed her vehicle due to traffic ahead. Jeremie Gregory was driving behind Aguillard and rear-ended her vehicle. As a result of the accident, Aguillard experienced extensive physical injuries and mental health issues. As a result, Aguillard filed a lawsuit for damages for her medical issues and vehicle damage against Mr. Gregory and the owner of his vehicle, the City of Baton Rouge. 

The trial court found in favor of Aguillard after a jury trial, determining that Mr. Gregory was 100% at fault for the accident. The jury awarded her $122,751 for past medical expenses and $450,150 for future medical expenses, totaling $572,901. However, Aguillard filed a motion for a Judgment Not Withstanding the Verdict (JNOV) in response to this award, claiming that the jury erred when it failed to award her more money for future medical expenses and general damages. The court denied her claim for more in future medical expenses but granted the JNOV as to general damages. The court granted the following amounts: $350,000 for physical pain and suffering, $75,000 for mental pain and suffering, and $15,000 for loss of enjoyment of life. This brought Aguillard’s total award to $1,012,901. 

Continue reading

by

request_hooks_chain_steel-1024x683If you are involved in a lawsuit, you probably have a lot of things on your mind. However, you must pay attention to the required deadlines and time to respond to documents from the other side, including requests for admission. If you do not respond on time, you might be deemed to have admitted to facts that are helpful to the other side. That could cause significant implications for your lawsuit. The following Louisiana lawsuit shows the deadline to answer and the effect of admission requests.

Steven Richard was involved in a car accident in Concordia Parish, Louisiana, involving a vehicle driven by Fred Taylor. Richard later sued Taylor, Fred’s Automotive (the shop where Taylor’s vehicle was repaired), and Caitlin Insurance, the insurance company that covered Fred’s Automotive. 

Fred’s Automotive and Caitlin Insurance brought a motion for summary judgment. They argued they could not be liable to Richard because their limited liability company had not existed when the accident occurred. As evidence, they introduced a printout with the relevant recording and other operating information for their limited liability company. The trial court granted their motion for summary judgment and dismissed the claims against Fred’s Automotive and Caitlin Insurance.

Continue reading

by

money_finance_house_mortgage-1024x678What happens if you win a lawsuit but the other side moves to reduce the amount of money you were awarded? This is the situation Marcus Berry found himself in after he was awarded over a million dollars in damages due to injuries he suffered in a car accident. 

Following a car accident, Berry sued the driver of the car that hit him, Leon Berry, and his insurer, Auto-Owners Insurance Company. The other driver admitted liability but contested the nature and extent of the damage Berry suffered. 

At trial, the jury agreed Berry was injured as a result of the accident.  They awarded him a total of $1.29 million in damages.  This consisted of $900,000 for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life previously, presently, and in the future, as well as $390,000 for medical expenses.  Following this award, the defendants moved for a new trial or remittitur (a procedure where the court can reduce an excessive verdict), arguing that the jury had awarded excessive damages. 

Continue reading

by

coins_currency_investment_insurance_0-1024x683Auto insurance can be beneficial when you are in a car accident. However, it isn’t uncommon to have specific provisions in your insurance policy that can limit your coverage. A recent case out of Kenner, Louisiana, interpreted whether certain caveats in an insurance policy can limit a client’s uninsured motorist coverage (UM/UIM).

Denise Breaux was driving on Interstate 10 behind a truck driven by Jonathan Blum. When a ladder fell off the back of Blum’s truck, Breaux tried to dodge the ladder that fell right into her path. Unfortunately, Breaux’s vehicle collided with Danny Castille’s tractor/trailer while attempting to avoid the ladder. Castille and his wife filed a lawsuit against Breaux, her insurer, and Blum, and then later added Lloyds at Lloyd’s, London (Lloyds) as a defendant. The Castilles were seeking UM/UIM coverage from Lloyds under a surplus lines insurance policy that was issued to Mr. Castille.  

Lloyds asserted that the Castilles were not entitled to UM/UIM coverage because they specifically issued an insurance policy that applied when the tractor did not have the trailer attached, known as Bobtail Liability insurance. Further, they argued that liability insurance was only available when the tractor was bobtailing; therefore, UM/UIM coverage only applied in the same scenario. Since, at the time of the accident, the Castilles’ tractor had a trailer attached and was not bobtailing, Lloyds sought 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