Articles Posted in Civil Matter

police_police_man_uniform-1024x681Workplaces have rules employees must follow. Termination for violation of these rules must be in good faith. What happens when an employee argues he was fired arbitrarily? The following case helps answer this question. 

Nolvey Stelly was terminated from the Lafayette Police Department  (LPD) for failing to follow orders. An investigation was ordered, and Stelly was suspended for fifteen days. He appealed the suspension, which was affirmed. Stelly then appealed to the trial court, which also upheld his suspension. Before his fifteen-day suspension, Stelly was called to a pre-determination hearing, which he secretly recorded and invited news outlets to attend. The recording and the invitation violated the LPD’s rules on professionalism. A second investigation was then conducted. During the investigation, Stelly was placed on paid administrative leave with strict orders not to engage in off-duty employment. Stelly worked a second job during this time, which prompted a third investigation of his misconduct. Stelly was then terminated. 

Stelly appealed his termination to the Lafayette Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Board (Board), which upheld the previous decisions. The trial court also affirmed the decision, which Stelly appealed. Stelly argued the ruling was not in good faith, the penalty was unreasonable, his actions did not violate the LPD’s operating procedures, his actions did not affect his working duties, and his discipline was not on par with his alleged offenses. 

bellingham_fire_ambulance_4-1024x683Determining liability can be complex when a car crash occurs and even more so when one of the vehicles involved is an ambulance. In Louisiana, the law applies a unique standard of care to emergency vehicle drivers. So what are the liability standards for ambulances and other emergency vehicle drivers involved in car accidents? The following lawsuit out of Lafayette, Louisiana, helps answer that question.

Gerald Janise was involved in a collision with William Gerard at an intersection in Lafayette, Louisiana. At the time of the accident, Gerard was driving an Acadian Ambulance Service vehicle. Janise filed a lawsuit against Gerard, Acadian Ambulance Service, and their insurer. 

Janise claimed at a red light, Gerard did not obey the traffic signals or exercise proper caution and collided with Janise’s car. Gerard filed a summary judgment motion, arguing under La. R.S. 32:24, the driver of an emergency vehicle responding to an emergency can only be held liable if his conduct amounts to reckless disregard for others’ safety. The court denied Gerard’s summary judgment motion. 

medical_drug_medicinal_products-1024x683We have all heard advice not to procrastinate. This is especially true if you are considering bringing a lawsuit. If you are considering filing a medical malpractice lawsuit against your doctor, you cannot wait indefinitely because Louisiana law has strict time limits for filing medical malpractice lawsuits. The following case out of Lafayette Parish shows the harsh consequences if you delay filing your case.

While working, Daniel McCauley injured his knee. He underwent treatment, but it was unsuccessful. McCauley returned to the same doctor, Dr. Malcolm Stubbs, approximately six years later, complaining of pain. He underwent additional procedures on his knee for the next five years. Nonetheless, McCauley continued to suffer from knee pain, which he claims to still suffer from to this day. 

Over a year after stopping treatment from Dr. Stubbs, McCauley filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Stubbs related to procedures Dr. Stubbs had performed on McCauley three and six years before him filing the lawsuit. The trial court granted an exception of prescription and dismissed the claim because McCauley did not file the lawsuit within three years or one year after his doctor-patient relationship with Dr. Stubbs ended. McCauley appealed, arguing the trial court erred in holding his claim was time barred.

bauer_elementary_asbestos_1-1024x768Unraveling the complexities of jurisdiction is essential when determining which court has the authority to hear a lawsuit. Whether a case is heard in state or federal court can have strategic implications, but the path to federal court is paved with complex legal requirements. In this article, we delve into the intricacies of jurisdiction and explore the factors determining whether your lawsuit can be heard in federal court.

The four Legendre brothers filed a lawsuit against Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (formerly known as Avondale) in Louisiana state court. The Legendres claimed Avondale exposed their sister to asbestos, resulting in her death from mesothelioma. 

The Legendres’ father had worked at Avondale’s shipyard building tugs for the United States government. He used asbestos for insulation in the tugs’ engine rooms. The Legendres claimed asbestos had stuck to their father’s body and clothing, which exposed their sister to asbestos when he returned home from work. 

spam_mail_email_mailbox-1024x532We can all relate to the embarrassment of hitting “reply all” on an email only intended for a smaller audience. Although usually “replying all” just results in embarrassment that eventually subsides, sometimes it can lead to more severe actions, such as losing your job. 

Frith Malin worked as a deputy director at the Orleans Parrish Communications District (“OPCD”), which was responsible for providing 911 services. After she had worked there for eight years, the executive director of the OPCD emailed all employees to inform them one of OPCD’s board members had been named CEO of another organization so that he would be stepping down from OPCD’s board. Malin accidentally hit “reply all,” instead of emailing just OPCD’s executive director criticisms about the departing board member.  

Three days later, Malin was suspended. OPCD conducted an internal investigation, which led to Malin’s eventual termination. A few months before sending the email, Malin had reported the Human Resources manager who investigated commentary related to sexually explicit images on six different occasions. There was no evidence Hobson was aware Malin had reported her, and Hobson was never disciplined. Following her termination, Malin filed a lawsuit against OPCD under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming a violation of her First Amendment rights. She also brought claims under Title VII and La. R.S. 23:967, Louisiana’s whistleblower statute. She alleged OPCD had retaliated against her for reporting the Human Resources manager. OPCD filed a motion to dismiss, which the trial court granted. Malin appealed, arguing the trial court erred in dismissing her claims against OPCD. 

yard_bike_lawn_mower-1024x768One of a parent’s worst nightmares is something happening to their child. This case delves into the heart-wrenching incident of a young child being struck by a neighbor’s car, leading to a complex legal battle to determine responsibility for the resulting injuries. While the child eventually recovered, the accident’s aftermath unleashed a lawsuit that delved into conflicting accounts and legal statutes governing pedestrian conduct. By examining the trial and appellate court’s proceedings, we gain insights that help answer the question: How does a court determine liability in a child pedestrian accident?

First – a bit of background on the context of the vehicle accident. When Sonya Meyer was driving home from taking her daughter to school, Cole Troxclair played in his front yard. As Meyer drove down the street from Troxclair’s home, her car struck Cole Troxclair. He was injured and spent about a day at the hospital. He returned to normal activities about a month or two later. Troxclair’s parents filed a lawsuit against Meyer and her insurer, Liberty Personal Insurance Company. Following a trial, the court found Meyer liable for the accident and awarded Troxclair $29,619.99 in damages. 

Meyer and her insurance company challenged the trial court’s finding that Meyer was solely responsible for the accident. They argued Troxclair was accountable for his injuries because he ran in front of Meyer’s vehicle, and Meyer did not have time to take action to avoid hitting him. They argued that Troxclair violated La.R.S.32:212(b), which says pedestrians shall not suddenly leave a curb or other safe place and enter a vehicle’s path. 

courthouse_311_jarvis_st-1024x768In personal injury cases, plaintiffs are often left vulnerable due to the accidents leading to their injuries. Hence, they require excellent attorneys who don’t exploit these vulnerabilities but instead zealously advocate on their behalf. For Claude Allen Newsome (“Newsome”), a November 2010 car accident in Bossier Parish, Louisiana, left him without sight, which was a direct result of macular degeneration caused by the accident. After that, Newsome was deemed legally blind and rendered a person with quadriplegia. Newsome appointed Robert Lansdale (“Lansdale”) as his power of attorney. What unfolded while seeking damages on behalf of Newsome demonstrates the necessity to lodge objections on the record and timely appeal matters.

After Newsome named Lansdale as his agent, Lansdale hired an attorney, Norman Gordon (“Gordon”), to represent Newsome in his personal injury lawsuit. The lawsuit eventually settled for approximately $7.4 million, and Gordon recommended to Newsome and Lansdale that setting up a special-needs trust would benefit Newsome. Lansdale told Gordon that Newsome would not consider establishing a trust. 

Concerned, Gordon withdrew his representation of Newsome, expressing that a conflict of interest had developed and relaying to the court that he believed Lansdale would not use the settlement proceeds for Newsome’s benefit. The court held a status conference where Gordon appeared allegedly without Newsome’s knowledge and asked the court to protect Newsome from the possibility of undue influence by Lansdale. Resulting of this conference, the court ordered that a special needs trust be created to receive the funds from Newsome’s settlement. Later, at a second status conference, the court-appointed Regions Bank as the corporate trustee of Newsome’s newly established special needs trust and appointed Newsome’s aunt, Stella Jean Godley as the trustee over Newsome’s person. The court also ordered that $3,879,835.67 of the $7.4 million settlement proceeds, minus the payment of fees, expenses, and liens, be transferred into the trust. At no point during these conferences and court orders did Newsome object or appeal. 

rear_mirror_mirrors_auto-1024x768Following an automobile accident, you will likely deal with insurance companies unwilling to pay what you believe you are owed. Insurance companies may rely on a multitude of evidence to support their decisions, including witness testimony. The following East Baton Rouge lawsuit demonstrates the weight courts may place on witness testimony following a car accident. 

Darral Norwood was driving a car owned by Toshika W. Smith, the mother of Laterrica Gustave. Gustave had Smith’s express permission to drive the car under certain circumstances without asking, although she was required to ask permission from Smith for all other purposes. Smith had an automobile liability policy on the car, where Smith was named as the only insured. The policy, however, included a provision excluding coverage of any damage caused by someone operating the vehicle at the time of the accident without the express or implied permission of the insured.   

On the day of the accident, Norwood, who did not have a driver’s license or a vehicle, claimed Gustave told him to take the car to work. Gustave, however, denied ever permitting Norwood to take the vehicle. Norwood, driving Smith’s car, then rear-ended Rachel Pray’s vehicle as she slowed down due to congested traffic. 

child_paternity_kids_baby-1024x669When a married couple welcomes a new child, the father is presumed to be the legal father.   In many cases, the legal father is also the biological father.  Unfortunately, there are cases when biological and legal fathers exist separately.   What legal rights and remedies does a biological father have to this child?  The timing of legal action is critical to answering the question.  

Courts typically use the parties’ initials in cases involving a minor child.  In a recent case on appeal from the Parish of Terrebonne, the alleged father, L.J.D., filed a lawsuit to establish paternity.  L.J.D. alleged involvement with M.V.S. while she was married to J.P.S.  M.V.S. had a child presumed to be J.P.S.’s legal child (the husband).  L.J.D. wanted the Thirty-Second Judicial District Court for the Parish of Terrebonne to order blood testing of all parties.  M.V.S. and J.P.S. responded, stating it was too late for L.J.D. to bring such an action because the child was older than one year.  The District Court disagreed that it was too late and ordered M.V.S. to get a blood test.  M.V.S. and J.P.S. appealed to the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal, asserting the action was perempted.  

Peremption is a period of time fixed by the law for the existence of a right.  If the right is not exercised within the time limits statutorily prescribed, that right is extinguished at the end of the peremptive period.  See La. C.C. 3458.  Louisiana law states that if a child is presumed to be the child of another man, an action to establish paternity must be brought within one year from the child’s birth.  See La.C.C. 198. The article also provides that if the mother deceives the father about his paternity, the father has one year from when he knew or should have known about paternity or within ten years of the child’s birth to bring an action.  To request a court to order blood testing, a potential father must also have the right to file a petition to establish paternity.  See La. R.S. 9:398.2(A)(2)

cow_beef_alm_cows-1024x683What happens when a cow crosses a road? Although that might sound like the start of a joke, that is the situation Zaine Kasem found herself in after being run over by a cow that escaped from a herd owned by Joyce B. Williams and H.R. Williams Cattle Company (“HRW”). 

There had been a heavy rainstorm. One of HRW’s employees inspected the pasture and fence, but he did not see any damage caused by the storm. Nonetheless, a cow escaped from the herd through a damaged fence and entered Kasem’s front yard in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. Kasem described the scene as a “circus” with many people running around trying to capture the cow. Finally, she went outside to see what was happening, and the cow ran into her, knocked her into the bed of a truck, and caused her to suffer injuries to her eye, nose, back, and neck, requiring medical treatment and pain and suffering.

Kasem sued Williams and HRW, claiming they breached the duty under La. C.C. art. 2321 to restrain their cattle and prevent them from entering other properties, injuring others, or otherwise causing damage. Williams and HRW filed a motion for summary judgment in response to the lawsuit.

Contact Information