Articles Posted in Civil Matter

Slip and Fall claims are filed in courts everyday and most are dismissed because the injured party could not prove anything. Important in a slip and fall case is “timeliness”: how soon after the incident a party filed a claim, got pictures of the accident area, hired an expert, etc. As you will see, the difference between a few days and a few weeks could make all the difference in a successful cause of action for a plaintiff. While accidents can occur almost anywhere, residents of New Orleans and other Gulf Coast cities know how difficult to navigate certain sidewalks and areas can be – to fail to file in time on a just claim would be a disaster if true harm has befallen a victim of such a fall.

In 1987, Mrs. Sellers was exiting a doctor’s office when she slipped and fell on a sidewalk. It had been raining that morning and the sidewalk, although covered, was clearly wet. Mrs. Sellers claimed to have slipped in a puddle of standing water outside the office entrance. She argued that the sidewalk, because of a defect, collected excess water that contributed to her fall. In an effort to recover damages from minor injuries sustained in the fall, Mrs. Sellers hired a professional photographer to take pictures of the sidewalk.

Under LSA-C.C. arts. 2317 and 2322, to prove liability for a defective thing, you must show that the defect in the thing poses an unreasonable risk of harm to others, and that the defect indeed caused the harm. The plaintiff, in this case Mrs. Sellers, has the burden of proving that (a) the defective sidewalk created an unreasonable risk of harm to patrons leaving the office, and (b) that the defective sidewalk in fact caused

If someone trespasses onto another’s land and is injured will the landowner be held liable for damages? It’s a difficult question that has a variety of rationales for both sides of the issue. The answer could be yes, but only in limited circumstances.

In October 1998, 15 year old Hunter Racine was tragically killed after he trespassed onto the industrial property of the Goldwasser Moving and Storage Company at River Road and St. George Avenue in Jefferson Parish. Hunter, his brother Logan, and two friends entered the unfenced property without permission. First, they climbed onto an elevated tank tower and dropped pumpkins and a bowling ball onto parked trucks below. Then Hunter left temporarily and the others found an unattended locked truck with the keys in the ignition. Logan climbed in the passenger window and started the engine. For some reason the engine wouldn’t turn off and the car remained running, not moving, for several minutes. When Hunter returned he jumped on the running board of the truck, reached through the driver window, and attempted to shut it off. Suddenly the truck jumped into gear and began moving forward. Hunter was killed when he was trapped between the fence and the moving truck.

Racine’s family brought a lawsuit against Goldwasser (and others) alleging three different liability theories: attractive nuisance, strict liability, and negligence. Goldwasser filed a motion for summary judgment which was originally denied but then granted in the Louisiana Supreme Court’s 2002 reconsideration. The decision provides a good explanation of these three legal theories as they relate to landowner liability.

Five Dry Creek youth were injured recently when a roof fell on them. As reported by Southwest Louisiana’s americanpress.com, the five were working to tear down on old building at the Dry Creek Baptist camp when the accident occurred. According to the article:

Beauregard Parish Sheriff Ricky Moses said that at around 3:45 p.m., officers received a call that the building had collapsed and that the youths were trapped underneath.

Everyone was pulled from the building by the time authorities arrived and two of the young people were seriously injured. Dry Creek Baptist Camp is located on La. 113 and is a Christian camp that specializes in youth and adult retreats.

Oftentimes, the most important question in an injury lawsuit is not “Can I recover?” Rather, the crucial questions involve whom to seek recovery from and where – i.e., in which court – to do that. Sometimes the answer lies simply in where the accident and injury occurred. However, as an older case from West Feliciana Parish indicates, proving that fact is not always as straightforward as it seems.

The case of Crum v. Southshore Railway Company, (230 So.2d 100 (1969)), revolves around the tragic drowning of John Floyd Crum. Mr. Crum was an employee of Southshore Railway Company. While working on a sand and gravel dredge, Crum fell into the water and drowned because he could not swim.Further, the boat on which he was working was not equipped with life-saving devices and was, generally speaking, poorly maintained.

From those facts, it would appear that Southshore would be legally responsible for the circumstances of Mr. Crum’s death. However, this was not the issue that this particular case focused. Rather, the important issue was whether the court had jurisdiction over the matter. The jurisdiction issue would be determined by whether the case fell under the federal statute known as the Jones Act (46 U.S.C. § 30101) or under Louisiana’s Workmen’s Compensation Act. The Jones Act permits injured seamen to recover damages from their employers for accidents that occur “on navigable waters.” Thus, if Mr. Crum’s accident happened on a navigable body of water, his estate could seek damages from Southshore under the Jones Act. Otherwise, Mr. Crum’s family and legal team would have to rely upon the state workers’ compensation program.