summary judgment

September 9, 2024

Ochsner’s Summary Judgment in Slip and Fall Case Overturned

pexels-tomfisk-1692693-1024x682 In 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:

September 7, 2024

“Wet Floor” Signs Prevail: Louisiana Court Reverses Slip and Fall Judgment, Highlighting the Importance of Adequate Warnings

by Berniard Law Firm

vidar-nordli-mathisen-ZZvsfoidr5g-unsplash-1024x729 In 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.

August 31, 2024

When Does Police Immunity Apply in Louisiana?

by Berniard Law Firm

pexels-pixabay-532001-1024x683 In 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.

August 28, 2024

When is a Judgment Truly Final? Understanding the Importance of Resolving All Claims in Louisiana

by Berniard Law Firm

pexels-colin-lloyd-2120291-3751006-635x1024 A 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.

August 24, 2024

Can a Hospital Be Held Liable for a Patient’s Sexual Assault that Occurred Offsite in Louisiana?

by Berniard Law Firm

pexels-pixabay-236380-1024x678 In 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.

August 22, 2024

Louisiana Court Reinstates Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Case: The Importance of Timely Expert Evidence

by Berniard Law Firm

pexels-chokniti-khongchum-1197604-2280547-684x1024 In 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.