This case examines the requirements for proving merchant liability in slip and fall cases, emphasizing the importance of evidence and the burden of proof.
Case Background
Lamarr Pierite sued Dollar General, alleging he slipped and fell in a liquid substance at their store, causing injuries. After a trial, the court found Dollar General liable and awarded Mr. Pierite $30,000 in general damages plus other costs. Dollar General appealed the judgment.
The following case dives into the world of “slip and fall” lawsuits in Louisiana, where the law sets specific requirements for holding merchants liable for injuries on their premises.
Case Background
Gwendolyn Thibodeaux fell while shopping at a Super 1 Foods store in Lafayette. Although the fall was captured on video, the cause was not immediately clear. Ms. Thibodeaux sued Super 1, alleging they were negligent in keeping their floors safe. After a trial, the court ruled in favor of Super 1, finding that Ms. Thibodeaux failed to prove the store’s liability under Louisiana law.
A recent decision from the Louisiana Court of Appeal has shed light on the nuanced boundary between whistleblowing and misconduct in the workplace. The case, Melancon v. Town of Amite City, involved a police officer terminated for running unauthorized criminal background checks and lying about it. While the officer claimed he was acting as a whistleblower, the court ultimately upheld his termination, raising important questions about the limits of whistleblower protection and the importance of adhering to internal policies and procedures.
Gerald Melancon, a police officer in Amite City, Louisiana, was fired after it was discovered he had used police databases to run unauthorized background checks on various individuals, including city council members, fellow officers, and even his own wife. Melancon claimed he was investigating potential corruption within the department and that he had reported his concerns to his superiors and the FBI. He argued his termination was retaliation for his whistleblowing activities.
However, the evidence showed that Melancon had repeatedly lied about conducting background checks during the department’s internal investigation. The police chief testified that Melancon was fired primarily for his dishonesty and unauthorized use of the databases, not for any alleged whistleblowing.
A 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.
Louisiana Personal Injury Lawyer Blog