by

pexels-veronika-bykovich-144474426-10400997-683x1024A recent United States Court of Appeals ruling for the Fifth Circuit highlights the complexities of establishing personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state employer in a lawsuit filed in Louisiana. The case, Blakes v. DynCorp, centered around a Louisiana resident who sued his Virginia-based employer for alleged wage and benefit violations under both Afghan and Louisiana law. The court ultimately dismissed the case for lack of personal jurisdiction, emphasizing the limited circumstances under which a Louisiana court can exercise authority over a non-resident defendant.

Everett Blakes, a Louisiana resident, was employed by DynCorp International, LLC, a Delaware company headquartered in Virginia, to work in Afghanistan. He signed an employment contract that specified Afghan law would govern any disputes and that any legal action would be resolved in an Afghan forum.

Despite this, Blakes filed a lawsuit in Louisiana alleging DynCorp failed to pay wages and benefits owed under Afghan labor law, the Louisiana Wage Payment Statute, and the terms of his employment contract. DynCorp moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the Louisiana court lacked personal jurisdiction over them.

Continue reading

by

pexels-kartatos-10622718-683x1024In a recent personal injury case, Latulippe v. West Jefferson Medical Center, the Louisiana Court of Appeal tackled the complexities of assessing damages in a car accident case where the plaintiffs had pre-existing medical conditions. The case arose from a rear-end collision on the Crescent City Connection bridge involving an ambulance. While the defendant admitted fault, the extent of the plaintiffs’ injuries and the appropriate compensation became the central point of contention. The appellate court ultimately affirmed the trial court’s decision, highlighting the importance of proving causation and the impact of injuries on the plaintiffs’ lives, even with pre-existing conditions.

Two brothers, Daniel and Casey Latulippe, were rear-ended by a West Jefferson Medical Center (WJMC) ambulance while stopped in traffic. The ambulance driver admitted fault, stating he didn’t brake to avoid the collision out of concern for the patient and EMT in the back.

Both brothers, along with their wives, sued WJMC for damages. The case went to trial, focusing solely on causation and the extent of the brothers’ injuries.

Continue reading

by

pexels-colin-lloyd-2120291-3751006-635x1024A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal for the Fifth Circuit decision has underscored a crucial procedural point in the state’s legal system: not all judgments are created equal. In Holmes v. Paul, the court dismissed an appeal because the trial court’s judgment, while seemingly resolving the main dispute, left a lingering reconventional demand unaddressed. This seemingly minor detail had significant consequences, highlighting the importance of understanding what constitutes a “final judgment” in Louisiana.

The case stemmed from a real estate deal gone sour. Ms. Holmes sued the Pauls for breach of contract after they canceled a contract to purchase her property. The Pauls countersued (filed a reconventional demand) seeking the return of their deposit. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Pauls, dismissing Ms. Holmes’ claims. However, the judgment was silent on the Pauls’ reconventional demand.

Ms. Holmes appealed, but the Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal, stating it lacked jurisdiction. The reason? The trial court’s judgment wasn’t considered “final” because it hadn’t addressed all the claims between the parties.

Continue reading

by

pexels-wildlittlethingsphoto-1996338-1024x683A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision has underscored the importance of adhering to legal formalities when gifting significant assets, even within a romantic relationship. The case involved a dispute over the ownership of a thoroughbred racehorse, highlighting the specific requirements for making a valid donation under Louisiana law.

Wesley Hawley, a racehorse trainer, purchased a filly named Clever Sue. He later placed his then-fiancee, Denise Reed’s, name on the horse’s registration papers. When the relationship ended, Hawley transferred the title back to himself. Reed sued, claiming ownership of the horse and the right to its prize money.

The trial court ruled in favor of Hawley, and the Court of Appeal upheld the decision.

Continue reading

by

pexels-shvetsa-3845653-1024x683A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision, Brimmer v. Eagle Family Dental, Inc., has underscored the critical procedural steps involved in bringing dental malpractice claims in the state. The case highlights the necessity of first presenting claims against qualified healthcare providers to a medical review panel before filing a lawsuit. Let’s delve into the specifics of this case and its implications for dental malpractice litigation in Louisiana.

Case Summary

Aurielle Brimmer received dental treatment at Eagle Family Dental, Inc. She subsequently developed complications that sheF attributed to the dental procedure. Believing she had suffered dental malpractice, Ms. Brimmer bypassed the medical review panel process and directly filed a lawsuit against Eagle Family Dental.

Continue reading

by

pexels-kampus-8441811-1024x684A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision underscores the importance of insurance agents fulfilling their duties with reasonable diligence and care. In Upscale Fashions, Inc. v. Botsay Insurance Network, Inc., an insurance agent’s failure to properly procure and communicate coverage details led to a significant financial loss for the insured and a hefty judgment against the agency.

Case Summary

Upscale Fashions, Inc., a retail clothing company, purchased a property insurance policy through Botsay Insurance Network, Inc. The policy initially included wind and hail coverage. However, this crucial coverage was excluded when the policy was renewed, allegedly without Upscale’s knowledge.

Continue reading

by

pexels-pixabay-236380-1024x678In a heart-wrenching case involving the sexual assault of a patient at an outpatient psychiatric treatment facility, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, recently affirmed a summary judgment that dismissed claims against two individual owners/officers of the facility. The decision, handed down in Sam v. Genesis Behavioral Hospital, underscores the legal complexities surrounding personal liability for corporate officers in cases of negligence. Let’s delve into the details of the case and its implications.

Facts and Procedural History

The plaintiff, Jessica Charles, attended an outpatient program at Genesis Behavioral Hospital. Tragically, she was lured off the premises by another patient, Dave Carter, Jr., and was subsequently raped and exposed to HIV. Understandably, Ms. Charles filed a lawsuit seeking damages from Mr. Carter and Genesis Behavioral Hospital, its insurer, and its officers, Will Arledge and Gretchen Karltenbach.

Continue reading

by

The recent decision in Anderson v. State from the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, highlights the complexities of assessing damages in personal injury cases, particularly when the plaintiff has pre-existing medical conditions. The court’s ruling underscores the principle that even if a plaintiff has prior health issues, a defendant can still be held liable for exacerbating those conditions due to their negligence. This blog post will analyze the critical aspects of the Anderson case and its implications for personal injury claims in Louisiana.

Laura Anderson was involved in a car accident with Marlys Sanders, an employee of the State of Louisiana. Both parties had conflicting accounts of how the accident occurred. A jury found both parties 50% at fault but awarded Anderson no damages, concluding she didn’t sustain any injuries from the accident. Anderson appealed this decision.

The medical evidence presented at trial showed that Anderson had several pre-existing conditions, including diabetes, high blood pressure, and prior injuries from previous car accidents. However, she argued that the accident worsened her existing conditions.

Continue reading

by

pexels-chokniti-khongchum-1197604-2280547-684x1024In a recent decision, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, underscored the importance of adhering to procedural rules in medical malpractice cases. The case, Ogbebor v. Lafayette General Medical Center, involved the death of Mary Ogbebor and her husband’s subsequent lawsuit against the medical professionals involved in her care. The court’s decision ultimately hinged on the plaintiff’s failure to provide timely expert testimony, leading to the reinstatement of a summary judgment in favor of the defendants. This blog post will delve into the case details, the court’s reasoning, and the implications for future medical malpractice litigation in Louisiana.

Case Background

Mary Ogbebor sought medical attention at Lafayette General Medical Center for chest discomfort and related symptoms. She was discharged after undergoing procedures performed by Dr. Salvaggio and Dr. Cavros. However, Mrs. Ogbebor returned to the emergency room a few days later with severe chest pain and tragically passed away.

Continue reading

by

pexels-chevanon-1108101-1024x682In today’s interconnected world, it’s not uncommon for employees to find themselves working across state lines. But what happens when an injury occurs in a different state than where the employment contract was formed? Whose laws apply? Can an injured worker sue their employer, or are they limited to workers’ compensation benefits? These questions were at the heart of the recent case Creel v. International-Matex Tank Terminals.

Richard Creel, an electrician, was injured while working at an IMTT facility in New Jersey. His employer, Versatech, was based in Louisiana. While Creel received workers’ compensation benefits in Louisiana, he also wanted to sue IMTT for negligence.

IMTT argued it was immune from lawsuits because it was Creel’s “statutory employer” under Louisiana law. Creel countered that New Jersey law should apply, and under that law, he had the right to sue. The initial court sided with IMTT, but an appeals court overturned that decision, sending the case back to the lower court for further review.

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 – 2024, Berniard Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design