Articles Tagged with summary judgment

pexels-ekaterina-bolovtsova-6077447-1024x683In a stark reminder of the importance of procedural precision in the legal world, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, recently dismissed an appeal due to a lack of a final, appealable judgment. The case highlights the critical importance of precise decretal language in judgments, even in seemingly straightforward summary judgment grants.

Cassandra Smith filed a lawsuit against B-3 Property, Blair Bail Bonds, and St. Roch Villa, alleging negligence in connection with a slip-and-fall incident at her apartment complex. After several years of litigation, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Smith. The defendants appealed this decision.

The Issue of Appellate Jurisdiction

pexels-ono-kosuki-5999944-1024x683In a recent decision by the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, the court affirmed a trial court’s judgment granting summary judgment in favor of Stanley Access Technologies LLC (Stanley) in a personal injury case brought by Vera Bernard. The case stemmed from an incident where Ms. Bernard allegedly sustained injuries after striking a revolving door at the Lafayette Airport.

Ms. Bernard filed a lawsuit alleging that the revolving door, installed by Stanley, came to an abrupt halt, causing her to fall and sustain injuries. She claimed Stanley was negligent in the installation, maintenance, repair, and employee training related to the door.

Stanley filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that it had no duty to Ms. Bernard as the responsibility for daily inspection and maintenance of the doors rested with the Lafayette Airport. They also argued that there was no evidence of the door malfunctioning.

pexels-lukas-hartmann-304281-1719475-1024x700In a recent ruling, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, upheld a trial court’s decision regarding the liability of Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Co., LLC, in a personal injury case brought by Tracy Collins under the Jones Act and general maritime law. The case centered around an incident where Mr. Collins, a deckhand on the vessel Derrick 62, sustained an injury while performing his duties.

Mr. Collins filed a lawsuit alleging he was injured while connecting pipes on a jetty in the Mississippi River. The task required the use of a chain binder, but the available equipment was inadequate. Mr. Collins, being the largest and strongest crew member, was asked to assist. During the process, another crew member struck the binder with a bar, causing injury to Mr. Collins’s thumb. Subsequently, Mr. Collins experienced neck and shoulder pain.

Great Lakes disputed the connection between the incident and Mr. Collins’s neck and shoulder complaints, citing independent medical examinations that found no relation.

pexels-pixabay-269630-1-1024x683In a recent decision by the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Golden Nugget Lake Charles, LLC, emerged victorious in a slip and fall case brought forth by Carolyn A. Watts. The case revolved around Ms. Watts’ alleged injuries sustained from a fall on the casino’s premises.

Ms. Watts initially filed a petition claiming she slipped and fell on a wet floor within the Golden Nugget casino lobby. However, during her deposition, she clarified that the incident occurred on the boardwalk outside the casino while it was raining. Ms. Watts attributed her fall to the wet conditions and alleged injuries to her right shoulder, neck, and back.

Golden Nugget filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the accident took place outside the casino, on the boardwalk, during rainy conditions. They contended that Ms. Watts could not establish that the walkway posed a hazard or that Golden Nugget’s negligence contributed to the incident. They supported their motion with evidence, including Ms. Watts’ deposition transcript, surveillance video of the incident, and an affidavit from their Risk Manager confirming the rainy weather and lack of prior complaints about the boardwalk.

pexels-sora-shimazaki-5668765-1024x683In a recent decision, the Louisiana Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment granted in favor of attorneys in a legal malpractice lawsuit. The case, highlights the critical distinction between contractual and delictual claims in insurance disputes and the potential impact on the applicable statute of limitations.

Michael Belanger was involved in a car accident and obtained a judgment against the other driver for an amount exceeding her insurance policy limits. He later sued the driver’s insurance company (GEICO) for bad faith failure to settle within policy limits. Belanger was represented by the same attorneys in both cases.

GEICO successfully argued in federal court that Belanger’s bad faith claim had prescribed (or expired due to the statute of limitations) because it was subject to a one-year prescriptive period for delictual (tort) actions. Belanger then sued his attorneys for legal malpractice, claiming they failed to argue that a ten-year prescriptive period for contractual actions applied.

pexels-tomfisk-1692693-1024x682In a recent decision, the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment granted to the Ochsner Clinic Foundation in a slip-and-fall case, emphasizing the importance of thoroughly examining factual disputes before granting such a motion.

Doris Stogner slipped and fell in the atrium of an Ochsner facility in 2011, allegedly sustaining injuries. She filed a lawsuit against Ochsner, claiming negligence in maintaining the premises and allowing a slippery substance to exist. Ochsner countered with a motion for summary judgment, asserting they had proper inspection procedures in place and were not liable for the actions of independent contractors.

Key Points of the Case:

vidar-nordli-mathisen-ZZvsfoidr5g-unsplash-1024x729In a recent Louisiana Court of Appeal case, Schroeder v. Hanover Insurance Company, et al., the court delved into the complexities of slip-and-fall cases and the crucial role of adequate warnings in determining a business’s liability. This decision highlights the importance of understanding merchant liability laws in Louisiana and how the presence of warning signs can significantly impact a personal injury claim.

Sybil Schroeder slipped and fell in the restroom of a travel plaza, sustaining injuries. She sued the travel plaza and its insurer, claiming they were negligent in maintaining a safe environment. However, she admitted in her deposition that she had noticed two “wet floor” signs before entering the restroom.

The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the presence of these signs demonstrated they had exercised reasonable care. The trial court initially denied the motion, but the Court of Appeal reversed this decision.

pexels-pixabay-532001-1024x683In a recent Louisiana Court of Appeal decision, a case involving a police shooting during an arrest attempt highlighted the complexities of qualified immunity for law enforcement officers. The case, Marshall v. Sandifer, centered around Ervin Marshall, who was shot by a state trooper while attempting to evade arrest. The court ultimately upheld the trooper’s immunity, but the decision provides important insights into the limits and application of this legal protection.

In 2010, Louisiana State Trooper Jared Sandifer and other officers were attempting to arrest Ervin Marshall on an outstanding warrant. They located him at his girlfriend’s apartment, and after obtaining permission to enter, they conducted a search. Trooper Sandifer found Marshall hiding in a closet. When Marshall made a sudden movement, Trooper Sandifer, fearing for his safety, shot him in the abdomen.

Marshall later sued Trooper Sandifer, the Louisiana State Police, and its superintendent, alleging negligence and excessive force. The defendants claimed immunity under Louisiana law, arguing that Trooper Sandifer’s actions were discretionary and within the scope of his lawful duties.

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.

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.

Contact Information