worker-1542657-1024x768Imagine what it’s like to be a dedicated employee. You love your job, you’re never absent from work due, and you never have any problems with your employer. Until one day, you are having an unexplained health problem. Turns out you have been exposed to a toxic substance and you believe your employer intentionally harmed you, causing significant injury.  It may be necessary to get more information to determine if an employer committed an intentional tort.

This scenario describes the case of James Owens, a welding instructor and an employee of the State of Louisiana. He worked at the Alexandria campus of the Louisiana Community and Technical College.  Mr. Owens filed a lawsuit alleging that he suffered injuries after he worked in a building with inadequate ventilation, where he was exposed to high levels of a particular matter and chromium for almost four years.

The State filed an exception of no right of action defense and the trial court heard oral arguments on the matter. During oral arguments, the trial court concluded that Mr. Owens had a right of action. However, when the trial court issued a final written judgment it ruled in favor of the State and determined that Mr. Owens’ exclusive remedy was worker compensation. The trial court also dismissed Mr. Owens lawsuit with prejudice. Mr. Owens filed an appeal alleging that the trial court made a legal error when it dismissed his intentional tort claim and failed to allow Mr. Owens to amend his petition stating a right of action.

contract-signing-1474333-768x1024No one likes to deal with insurance matters. Shopping for insurance and understanding the terms of an insurance policy can be complex. Most people are happy to just pay their monthly premiums and know that they have insurance when they need it – and then hope they never need it at all. One woman learned how complex insurance matters can be when she was injured in July of 2012 when the Pontiac Sunfire that she was driving was involved in an auto accident in Ouachita Parish.

The insurer of the other driver who was involved in the accident tendered payment to the plaintiff, Sonya Rodgers, in an amount equal to the policy limits. At the time of the accident, Rodgers was insured by State Farm. Rodgers sued State Farm alleging that she should be provided uninsured motorist coverage for the injuries she suffered in the accident. State Farm filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that uninsured motorist coverage was not provided because Rodgers rejected such coverage in April of 2010.

Rodgers contended in opposition to the motion that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether there was uninsured motorist coverage at the time of the accident. Rodgers argued that after the original vehicle covered under her State Farm policy became inoperable, she turned its license plate into the DMV, alerted her State Farm agent that she would no longer need the coverage because the vehicle was broken down beyond repair, and she stopped paying premiums to State Farm. Rodgers said that she considered the policy to be cancelled after she took those steps. Rodgers further said that after acquiring the Pontiac Sunfire she contacted her State Farm agent and negotiated a new policy and she believed that she had uninsured motorists coverage because State Farm never asked her to execute a new rejection of uninsured motorist coverage form. See La. R.S. 22:1295.

bike-trail-1437881-1024x683While participating in physical therapy sessions, most people would probably expect to be monitored by a therapist for the length of the session to ensure that things run smoothly. Unfortunately for one woman, Mrs. Laura Joinder, her physical therapist had other plans. As a result, Mrs. Joinder sued the defendant in Ouachita Parish for injuries she suffered while in their care.

In December of 2011, Mrs. Joinder had neck surgery and her surgeon referred her to receive physical therapy from Dr. Jesse Weid’s office. The attendant adjusted the exercise bike for the first and second visits but failed to do so on the third or fourth visit. The attendant also was not present in the room with Mrs. Joiner during the remaining visits. Consequently, she fell while getting off the bike and injured her left knee. The accident required her to undergo surgery, which was unsuccessful due to further complications.

In an affidavit filed in December of 2013, Mrs. Joiner documented that she twisted and slightly torqued her left knee while getting off the exercise bike and that this caused severe pain along with discomfort. Prior to that, in January of 2013, the defendants responded through interrogatories and said that Mrs. Joiner’s knee issues were from a preexisting condition that was not stated in the cause of action. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss or stay a motion for summary judgment, along with a memo and attached exhibits.

construction-site-1229346-1024x680If your contractor tells you a job will take a day, you might expect it to actually take a week. But, do you have to pay your contractor for time they are unable to work? Depending on the contract agreement you signed you may be liable for the costs the contractor has even when work is not going according to plan. This may be particularly true if you fail to uphold some part of the bargain. Whenever you enter a contract or feel that a contract may have been breached, it is important that you fully understand your contract. A case out of Baton Rouge in 2001 gives some insight into the necessary proof when trying to recover for contract losses.

In March of 2001, the city of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, entered into a contract with F.G. Sullivan, Jr. to improve Tiger Bend Road. The nearly $4,000,000 contract involved the expansion of the road, as well as the installation of a storm drainage system. Baton Rouge had been acquiring the rights to utilities on the road that would be in the way of the project. Both parties had agreed that the utility lines would be removed prior to Sullivan commencing work. The city informed the contractor that the utilities would be removed by April 1, 2001, and that work was to commence the following day.

Work began on the drainage system on April 2, but a snag was quickly hit. As construction on the drainage system began the company realized that the utility lines had not been moved. The city refused Sullivan for the time when his idle equipment was unable to work. Sullivan filed a lawsuit against the city seeking recovery for the time his equipment was idle, along with additional overhead expenses resulting from the utilities delays. At a bench trial, which is a trial with only a judge and no jury, just under a $1,000,000 was awarded in damages.

ambulance-1440932-1024x685If you are injured in an accident, it is important to be prepared before you testify at your deposition. Otherwise, you may find yourself making statements that opposing counsel can use against you. This is the painful lesson Dwan Jones learned in 2015, when a Louisiana Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s dismissal of her case before it even went to trial. Dwan was injured in an automobile accident while riding in the passenger seat of an ambulance that was transporting a patient to the hospital. Based on Jones’ own testimony during a deposition, the Court of Appeals affirmed that Jones had made statements that negated the presence of any genuine dispute of material fact. Had Jones’ answered the questions differently her case may have at least gone to trial, which would have allowed a jury to determine whether her injuries were caused by the ambulance driver’s actions.

The ambulance Jones was riding in was struck at an intersection by a taxi cab. Louisiana Emergency Vehicle Statute La. R.S. 32:24 provides certain privileges for drivers of authorized emergency vehicles, such as ambulances when responding to emergency calls. These privileges include allowing the driver to “[p]roceed past a red [light]” after “slowing down or stopping as may be necessary for safe operation.” But the privileges only apply when the “vehicle is making use of audible or visual signals sufficient to warn motorists of their approach.”  See La. R.S. 32:24.  In this case, the light was red against the ambulance, but not the taxi, so the ambulance driver’s liability, and that of his employer, turned on whether or not the ambulance driver safely proceeded through the intersection.

As long as the ambulance driver complies with the statute, the driver can only be found culpable for an accident if he additionally exhibited some type of “reckless disregard” for safety. Jones argued that the trial court should not have applied this standard because the driver was not in compliance with the statute to begin with. Alternatively, Jones argued that even if the driver had been in compliance with the statute, the statute still should not apply because the emergency situation had ended, meaning that the driver should not have gone through the intersection against the red light.  Lastly, Jones argued that because the reckless disregard standard did not apply, the default “ordinary negligence” applied and, under that standard, the driver was culpable because he was inattentive at the time he entered the intersection.

money-1237119-828x1024If you fail to make payments on a mortgage you may lose your home, but you may also be held liable for any remaining debt after your home has been sold. If the sale of your house does not pay off the balance of what you owe, the institution owning the mortgage may come after you for a deficiency judgment. A deficiency is essentially the balance remaining on the loan after the sale of the property. For example, if a homeowner with a $100,000 mortgage defaults and the bank sells their home for $75,000, there would be a $25,000 deficiency. The owner of the debt may be able to come after a person for the deficiency.

In order for a debt owner to get a deficiency judgment against a debtor in Louisiana, the owner of the debt must file a lawsuit against the debtor in court. In order to find in favor of the owner of the debt, the court must find that the debt satisfied all requirements of the 1989 Louisiana Credit Agreement Statute.  See La. R.S. 6:1121.  One of the provisions of the statute states “a debtor shall not maintain an action on a credit agreement unless the agreement is in writing, expresses consideration, sets forth the relevant terms and conditions, and is signed by the creditor and the debtor.” A recent case out of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, shows what this language means.

In August of 2007, Kristina Jackson took out a loan for $224,220 with First American Bank, which she secured using a mortgage on a piece of property she owned. Jackson defaulted on the loan, and the bank sold the property in February of 2013. After the sale of the property a deficiency remained. Jackson claims she only agreed to mortgage the property because a First American Officer told her that it was only a temporary mortgage and it would be released within 30 days after the loan dispersed.

ancient-ruins-flooded-by-water-1622023Imagine walking into your recently deceased parent’s home and discover that due to freezing temperature the pipes burst and there is water everywhere. You are shocked and angry because your parent’s beloved home is damaged significantly. Photographs and family memories that filled the home are now drowning in water. You had contacted the city on to shut off the water prior to this unfortunate incident, but it is only after the water damage discovery is made that the city finally complies. Initially you are upset with the city’s actions, but you didn’t decide to sue the city until one year after the damage to the property occurred. Could you still recover damages?


A Louisiana court answered this question when Ms. Linda Rosenberg-Kennett filed a lawsuit against the City of Bogalusa. This scenario happened to Ms. Rosenberg- Kennett when she discovered her deceased father’s home suffered water damage due to freezing pipes bursting during the winter. In March of 2009, she contacted the city to turn off the water. An employee came out to turn off the water, but it turns out the water was never turned off.  After the pipes burst in January of 2010, Ms. Rosenberg-Kennett contacted the City of Bogalusa again on numerous occasions to turn off the water valve to the property, but it was not turned off until February 1, 2010.


In January of 2011, Ms. Rosenberg filed a lawsuit against the City of Bogalusa for negligence due to its failure to turn off the water. She sought to recover damages. The City of Bogalusa filed a motion of summary judgment, but the trial court dismissed the motion.  The court ruled in favor of Ms. Rosenberg-Kennett and found the city liable and ordered them to pay damages in the amount of $50,618.95.  The City of Bogalusa appealed the trial court’s decision because they believed the trial court should not have denied their motion for summary judgment and award Ms. Rosenberg-Kennett damages, asserting that the City was not liable.

stethoscope-1427015Court procedures can be confusing for many people.  Cases can be even more confusing when they involve medical malpractice claims.  One Louisiana case arising from injuries suffered by the plaintiff from treatment he received in March and April of 2009 reached the summary judgment stage.  The complaint was originally filed with the Commissioner of Administration in accordance with the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act.  See La. R.S. 40:1231.1.  A medical review panel was convened on three separate occasions and concluded that there was a deviation from the standard of care by Chabert Medical Center, the defendant in the case, and its employees, but there had not been a deviation from the standard of care by a certain Dr. Bass. Consequently, in response to a lawsuit filed by the plaintiff naming Dr. Bass, Dr. Bass filed a motion for summary judgment.   

Summary judgment is a favored court procedure and is designed to get a just, speedy, and less expensive finding on a cause of action.  A summary judgment is a court order ruling that no factual issues remain to be tried and therefore a cause of action or all causes of action in a complaint can be decided without a trial.  Under article 966(G) of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, if a person is found not to be negligent, not to be be at fault, and not to have caused the injury or damage in a summary judgment, it is mandatory for the trial judge to specify in the motion that the charged party is not at fault and not to be party to subsequent allocations of fault.  See LA.C.C.P art. 966(G).  Usually, it is the party filing for summary judgment that bears the burden of proof.  

A claim asserting medical malpractice must show beyond a preponderance of the evidence that the doctor breached an applicable standard of care that caused the resulting injury. The plaintiff in this case was unable to establish a connection between the standard of care and the resulting injury, and therefore did not dispute the defendants motion for summary judgment, but requested that the court include a provision mirroring the language of La. C.C.P. article 966(G) in its judgment.  Ultimately, the trial court granted Dr. Bass’ motion for summary judgment, but struck through the La. C.C.P. article 966(G) language, which the plaintiff argued was an error and appealed to the circuit court.

the-stack-1427073Once a court rules on a motion or a jury verdict is delivered, the losing party faces an uphill battle in getting a reversal.  If you are party to a lawsuit, be sure to consult with an attorney who will help you assess the risks of a lawsuit and the best way to move forward. A good attorney will make sure that your interests are accounted for and that if you go to trial, you get it right the first time. An attorney should work hard for you, be diligent and thorough, and get you the award you deserve. In the case of Barry and Lori Pennison, they got just that: a thorough and diligent attorney who helped them get a just award.

Recently, the First Circuit Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the Trial Court and jury verdict that awarded the Pennisons a total of $4,200,000. This judgment was against the defendants, James Carrol, Jr. of Frisco Construction Company, The Gray Insurance Company and GEICO General Insurance Company.

Barry Pennison was injured when the defendant, James Carroll, Jr., who was working on the job, turned left into his company’s industrial yard on La. Highway 57 in Terrebonne Parish. Due to the accident, Barry was severely injured and unable to work or enjoy the life he had become accustomed to. The facts of the case showed that Mr. Carroll did not signal when he turned and that he did not yield to Barry, who was on a motor cycle at the time and had the right of way. Barry was driving the speed limit and honked at Mr. Carroll in his pick-up truck to no avail. Mr. Carroll did not stop. Emile Hotard, Jr., a witness, noted that everything happened fast, but that neither he nor Carroll saw Pennison coming.

LSUEmployment discrimination can be damaging for both parties involved. It generally involves employee mistreatment, or a perception of such, that causes harm to the plaintiff. The employee must show that the employer treated him or her differently because of a federally protected reason, such as age, race, religion, or disability. Conversely, if the “at will” employee cannot prove he or she was fired for one of these reasons, there is no cause of action. Employment discrimination can be pursued in state court or federal court. However, when one court dismisses the action, a plaintiff cannot bring the same claim to another court. This idea is known as res judicata or claim preclusion, meaning “a matter already judged.” Having a good lawyer who knows the local and federal rules of civil procedure could save a plaintiff the time and money that comes with having their claims barred.

Recently, a professor at Louisiana State University (“LSU”) claimed the school discriminated against him for not obtaining sufficient grant money. The professor, Dr. Madhwa Raj, further alleged that the school administration harassed him and pressured him to retire. Dr. Raj claimed LSU even closed his laboratory in an effort to get him to retire. The harassment exacerbated his diabetes and led to him suffering neuropathy and chest pains. He also tore his rotator cuff, which required him to take an extended sick leave. Dr. Raj sued LSU, its Board of Supervisors (“LSU Board”), and the LSU Health and Sciences Center in New Orleans (“LSU Health”).

The professor’s complaints were dismissed in federal district court. Then, he filed in state trial court but added a Family Medical Leave Act claim. However, LSU used Res Judicata as a defense because the professor’s state court claims arose from the same operative facts as his federal court claims.

Contact Information