Articles Tagged with summary judgment

mma_fight_maza_maza-1024x683This case delves into a courtroom clash that spilled over into a legal battle, raising questions about the appropriateness of summary judgment when factual disputes remain at the heart of the matter.

Case Background

Felix DeJean, an attorney, got into a physical altercation with District Attorney Bradley Burget while discussing a case in a judge’s chambers. DeJean was later convicted of simple battery in a criminal trial. He then filed a civil lawsuit against Burget, seeking damages for injuries sustained in the altercation. Burget claimed he acted in self-defense, arguing that DeJean was the aggressor. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Burget, dismissing DeJean’s case.

car_old_car_car-2-1024x683The following case explores the concept of “permissive use” in the context of uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM) insurance coverage. Specifically, it examines whether a son, given a company truck for work and personal use, had the authority to grant his father permission to drive the vehicle, thereby extending UM coverage to the father under the company’s policy.

Case Background

Randal Boudreaux was involved in an accident while driving a truck owned by AES Drilling Fluids, LLC, and insured by Commerce and Industry Insurance Company. The truck was assigned to Randal’s son, Micah, an AES employee. Micah had been given the truck for both business and personal use, subject to certain company policies.

pexels-brett-sayles-1756957-1024x683A celebratory night out turned into a nightmare for Reuben Ellis when he was shot in a parking lot after attending a friend’s wedding reception at Bella Noche nightclub. Ellis’s quest for justice led him to sue not only the nightclub but also the property owner, Plaza Holdings, LLC. This legal battle highlights the complexities of premises liability and the extent to which property owners are responsible for the safety of their tenants’ patrons.

The Incident & Ensuing Legal Battle:

In the early hours of July 27, 2015, gunfire erupted in the parking lot outside Bella Noche, leaving Ellis with a gunshot wound to the neck. He sued several parties, including Plaza Holdings, the owner of the shopping center where the nightclub was located.

pexels-adrien-olichon-1257089-5230094-683x1024In the world of industrial contracts, the devil often lies in the details – especially when it comes to indemnity clauses. These clauses determine who bears the financial responsibility if something goes wrong, and they can be a source of heated legal battles. This is precisely what happened in the case of Godfrey T. Fagot v. Dow Chemical Company, et al., where Turner Industries and Honeywell International clashed over the interpretation of their contracts.

The Underlying Lawsuit:

Godfrey Fagot, a former pipefitter/welder, sued several companies, including Turner Industries and Honeywell, claiming he developed mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure while working at Honeywell’s facility. Turner, a contractor for Honeywell, had signed contracts in 1978 and 1985 containing indemnity provisions.

pexels-kelly-1179532-3794777-1024x683In a recent decision, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, overturned a summary judgment in favor of the City of Kenner and Veolia Water North America-South, LLC, in a personal injury case. The case, Candido Perdomo v. City of Kenner and Veolia Water, involved a garbage collector, Candido Perdomo, who was injured when a portion of the street collapsed under his garbage truck.

Mr. Perdomo, employed by Ramelli Janitorial Service, was collecting garbage for the City of Kenner when a section of 27th Street near the intersection of Salem Street crumbled beneath the weight of the garbage truck he was riding in. The collapse was attributed to a leaking sewer line.

Kenner and Veolia, the company contracted to operate and maintain the Kenner sewer system, moved for summary judgment, arguing that Mr. Perdomo could not prove they had prior knowledge (or ‘notice’) of the defect in the road, a crucial element in such cases. The trial court agreed and dismissed Mr. Perdomo’s claims.

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.

Contact Information