Articles Posted in Litigation

by

Many people believe that the term “medical malpractice” means a doctor can be sued any time a doctor harms or makes a mistake while treating a patient. Like most states, Louisiana’s Medical Malpractice Act protects doctors from frivolous, or meritless litigation, meaning incidental harm or minor mistakes made by a doctor will probably not result in a malpractice violation. The person bringing a malpractice claim against a doctor must prove certain elements exist, most commonly that: (1) the patient suffered a significant injury; (2) the doctor or hospital staff did not meet the standard of care typical of medical professionals; and (3) the medical mistake or lack of care was the direct cause of the patient’s injury.

To help you understand, please consider the following examples:

(A) A patient comes into a doctor’s office complaining of chest pains and indigestion. The doctor fails to make a diagnosis or provide treatment and sends the patient home. The patient suffers a heart attack the next day.

Continue reading

by

The majority of asbestos cases in Louisiana involve corporate defendants: domestic and foreign corporations responsible for the individual’s exposure to the dangerous chemicals. Claims against corporations are subject to the procedural rules of venue. The venue is determined to be the place in which the injured party may bring their case. This is a very important concept in civil procedure that can have a tremendous impact on a case. Under the general rules of venue:

An action against a domestic corporation (Louisiana corporation) shall be brought in the parish where its registered office is located. Also, an action against a foreign corporation licensed to do business in the state shall be brought in the parish where its designated primary business office is located. An action against a foreign corporation not licensed to do business in Louisiana and without an agent for service shall be brought in the parish of plaintiff’s domicile.”

With multiple defendant corporations, it may be in the injured party’s benefit to show that the defendants are solidary obligors. Solidary Obligors is a term used in Louisiana for parties that share responsibility for a person’s injuries. Proving this relationship makes it easier on the injured party to file claims in the proper court (venue) because they need only show that venue is proper as to one of the defendants. This relieves some of the pressure of ensuring jurisdiction over each defendant corporation to their claim. Many cases can become very complex in arguments over appropriate venue and this doctrine can allow a claimant in Louisiana to litigate in a convenient venue where at least one of the defendants fall in Louisiana.

Continue reading

by

Louisiana law requires motorists to carry liability insurance on any automobile they own. This coverage pays for property damages or personal injury for which you may be legally responsible. Unfortunately, not everyone on the road has insurance. However, insurance companies have built in protection for drivers that are injured by an uninsured/underinsured motorist.

In 1999, Carol Tedeton was injured during her employment with an automobile service station. She was hit by a minor without adequate car insurance. To recover for her injuries, Carol argued that she was covered under the garage’s uninsured/underinsured motorist (“UM”) policy.

Under La. R.S. 22:1406(d), any person who enjoys the status of insured under a Louisiana motor vehicle liability policy which includes uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage enjoys coverage protection simply by reason of having sustained injury by an uninsured/underinsured motorist.

Continue reading

by

A five year old and seven year old were injured in pit bull attacks in New Orleans March 30 and 31. Shockingly, these attacks both occurred within only 18 hours! First, a five year old girl was mauled in the Gentilly area. A mere eighteen hours later a seven year old was attacked in Algiers and suffered an injury to her ankle.

In Gentilly, the girl was playing basketball with other kids around 6:40 p.m. near the 55000 block of Warrington Drive. Three dogs charged the children. An intact pit bull (not spayed or neutered) chased the girl into a yard and cornered her, biting her on the head, ears, shoulder, and chest. A neighbor called police who arrived on the scene while the child was still under attack. The officers were able to lure the dog away before shooting and killing the animal. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) cited the dog owner for owning a vicious animal and having a roaming dog. The municipal violations could later be upgraded to criminal charges. An investigation has shown that someone may have let the dogs out of the owner’s possession. The owner was unaware his dog was involved in an attack.

The second incident involved a seven year old girl who was walking between two homes in her Algiers neighborhood when she was attacked by a brown pit bull. The girl was shaken up and unable to tell authorities what happened. Witnesses saw other dogs fighting with the pit bull shortly after the attack. The owner of the brown pit bull was cited for owning a vicious dog, allowing it to roam at large, and having no proof of a rabies vaccination. The dog will be held for ten days while a rabies test is completed before a judge decides its fate.

Continue reading

by

On television, legal cases are almost always decided by a dramatically discovered fact or through emotional testimony. In reality, many cases are decided by court rules or procedural technicalities. This might be true even if the substantive legal arguments would produce a different result. Such a scenario is demonstrated by the case of Pickett v. International Paper Company, a workplace asbestos exposure case involving both Webster and Morehouse Parishes.

Two procedural rules were at issue in the Pickett case. One of these was venue. In legal terminology, venue refers to the location of the proper legal location in which a case should be filed – in other words, the court in the proper parish. Under Louisiana’s rules of civil procedure, proper venue is typically determined by where an alleged defendant lives, is located, or conducts business (LSA-C.C.P. art. 41). That rule embodies an aspect of fairness to the party who must defend itself against a claim of wrongdoing. If there are jointly responsible defendants, the venue rule need only be satisfied as to one of them. If a defendant is a business or corporation that does not have an actual place of business in the state, a plaintiff may file suit in the parish where the plaintiff lives (LSA-C.C.P art. 42).

The second rule that helped determine the outcome of the Pickett case was presciption. Under Louisiana law, an injured party has one year from the date the injury was sustained to file a lawsuit. That one-year limit is often called the prescriptive period. If not filed within one year, that particular claim is barred by the passage of time. In certain cases, the prescriptive period may be essentially paused. However, in most cases the one-year limit applies.

Continue reading

by

For those struggling to visualize the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil leak being faced by Louisiana and other Gulf Coast residents, the Times-Picayune has released a helpful graphic depiction of the various elements involved in the matter.

Using information from the US Coast Guard, NOAA, BP and Transocean, Dan Swenson provides the following

We would encourage our readers to check out the full article accompanying the graphic as it outlines with great detail the situation in New Orleans, Venice and other areas in the Gulf Coast that are waiting anxiously to understand what fate will befall them in the face of this environmental disaster.

Continue reading

by

Folsom Police responded to calls recently reporting an erratic driver on Highway 25. Unfortunately they were not able to get to the scene before the dangerous driving led to an accident. The driver at fault, Lesley Myers of Angie, was reportedly traveling south through Folsom at high speeds when his 1993 Pontiac Bonneville crashed into a horse trailer near the intersection of HIghway 25 and Broadway Street and then struck a northbound truck.

According to an article in the St. Tammany news, this was no ordinary traffic accident. In fact,

When the call came in, it was reported that Myers was in possession of a gun and that he was holding the firearm as he stood in the center of La. 25.

Continue reading

by

In the predawn hours of an October 21, 1995, election day, Elizabeth Cazes arrived at a polling place on Antonio Road in West Baton Rouge where she was scheduled to work as election commissioner. She entered the building using a set of concrete steps at the front entrance of the building that were dimly lit by a single light bulb at approximately 5:20 a.m.

About a half hour later, Ms. Cazes came back outside to post an election sign. As she descended down the stairs, Cazes slipped and fell when she placed her foot on a cracked off portion of the bottom step. Cazes broke her fall with her right hand causing a severe fracture to her right wrist which required multiple surgeries and an external fixation device to be applied to her arm. Ms. Cazes filed suit against the Parish of West Baton Rouge (the “Parish) and the West Baton Rouge Parish Council (the “Council”), who were identified as the owners of the polling place. Cazes alleged that the stairs were defective and that the Parish and Council were strictly liable for her injuries. The trial court found for Cazes, and the Parish and Council appealed.

In an effort to make the voting process as pleasant as possible for all Louisiana citizens, state law requires that the owner of a polling place provide a “reasonably safe place for all voters and election commissioners expected to frequent the premises.” Burgess v. City of Shreveport, 471 So.2d 690, 693 (La. 1985). A polling place owner who allows his facility to fall into disrepair risks a legal claim from in injured voter under a theory of strict liability. Under this theory, an injured plaintiff is required to show: (1) the property which caused the injury was under the control of the defendant; (2) the property’s condition created an unreasonable risk of harm to persons on the premises; and (3) the defect in the property was a cause of the injury. See Oster v. Dept. of Transp. & Development, 582 So. 2d 1285 (La. 1991). When the polling place owner is the government, Louisiana law further requires the plaintiff to prove that the owner knew or should have known of the defect, and that it had a reasonable amount of time to repair the problem but did not do so. La. R.S. 9:2800.

Continue reading

by

For those Louisiana residents, whether they live in Baton Rouge, Lafayette, New Orleans, Mandeville, Lake Charles, Shreveport or Alexandria, that have questions dealing with Chinese Drywall, feel free to look at our Chinese drywall information section. This blog section focuses on the timeline of this toxic wallboard in America. Whether featuring Chinese drywall symptoms or Chinese drywall lawsuits, our posts hopefully will help people both in Louisiana and a variety of Gulf Coast states like Texas, Mississippi and Florida better understand this complex issue.

If you have any questions on the complex legal issues that exist with this matter, including “How do I know if I have Chinese drywall?” or “How to Identify Chinese drywall in your home?” feel free to contact our firm. It is important to take action as soon as possible in order to secure your legal rights. Click here to contact us today.

by

The St. Mary’s Parish Council has recently voted unanimously to ban pit bulls within unincorporated areas of the parish.

As reported in Franklin’s Daily Iberian, the ordinancemakes it illegal to: 


own, possess, keep, exercise control over, maintain, harbor, transport or sell any pit bull…in the designated areas of St. Mary Parish. It also provides restrictions and stipulations to any owner currently owning the breed as of the bill’s starting date of July 1.

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