Category: Accidents

  • The Foundations of Louisiana Law: Where Our Rules Come From

    Dynamic illustration of the Louisiana State Capitol and golden scales of justice over law books, symbolizing Louisiana’s unique blend of legislation and custom in its Civil Law systemWhat is Law in Louisiana? More Than Just Written Words

    Have you ever wondered what makes something a “law” in Louisiana? It might seem like a simple question, but understanding the true sources of our legal rules is crucial for navigating everyday life and protecting your rights. In Louisiana, a unique legal system rooted in the civil law tradition, the answer is a fascinating blend of official pronouncements and long-standing practices. Today, we’ll break down the fundamental concepts found in Louisiana Civil Code Articles 1, 2, and 3, which together explain where our laws originate.

    The Primary Source: Legislation – The Will of the People (CC 1 & 2)

    At its core, Louisiana law primarily comes from legislation. Civil Code Article 2 tells us that “Law is a solemn expression of legislative will.” What does this mean in plain English? It means that the most important and common way laws are created in Louisiana is through our elected representatives in the state legislature. When they debate, vote on, and pass a bill, and it’s signed into law by the Governor, that’s a “solemn expression of legislative will.”

    Think of it this way: our society decides on rules and policies, and the legislature is the body we entrust to formally write those rules down. These written laws – statutes, codes, and ordinances – are the backbone of our legal system. They cover everything from how contracts are formed to how property is owned, and they are the guiding principles that courts use to resolve disputes.

    The Secondary Source: Custom – Unwritten Rules with Legal Power (CC 1 & 3)

    While legislation is the primary source, it’s not the only one. Civil Code Article 1 states that the sources of law are “legislation and custom.” This brings us to a fascinating aspect of civil law: the role of custom.

    Civil Code Article 3 explains that “Custom results from practice repeated for a long time in conformity with a rule of policy, peace, or order.” Essentially, if people in a community consistently act in a certain way over a significant period, and this practice is generally accepted as the correct way to do things – promoting peace, order, or a specific policy – that custom can actually attain the force of law. However, there’s a critical condition: custom only has the same authority as legislation when it is not in conflict with legislation.

    This means that if a written law exists on a particular matter, custom cannot override it. Custom fills the gaps where legislation is silent or helps interpret the intent behind a written law. For example, local business practices, specific ways of handling transactions within an industry, or long-standing community traditions might be considered custom if they meet these strict requirements.

    Why This Matters to You

    Understanding these foundational principles is not just for lawyers; it’s vital for every citizen. Knowing that law comes from both explicit legislative acts and, in some cases, established customs, helps you:

    • Understand Your Rights and Responsibilities: Knowing where laws come from empowers you to better understand the rules that govern your life, your property, and your interactions with others.
    • Navigate Disputes: Whether you’re dealing with a contract issue, a property dispute, or any other legal challenge, identifying the applicable law – be it a statute or an established custom – is the first step toward resolution.
    • Engage with the Legal System: It demystifies the legal process, showing that laws aren’t just arbitrary rules, but expressions of collective will or long-accepted practices.

    Need Legal Guidance? Contact Us Today.

    The intricate details of Louisiana law can be complex. If you have questions about a specific legal matter, or if you believe your rights might be affected by legislation or custom, don’t hesitate to seek professional legal advice. Our experienced team is here to help you understand your situation and navigate the legal landscape. Contact us today for a consultation.

    Written By Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Articles: The Two Pillars of Louisiana Law: Legislation & Custom Explained (CC Arts. 1-3)

    and

    Who’s Responsible When a Step Collapses?

  • The Advocate Highlights Jeff Berniard’s Expertise in Smitty’s Supply Explosion Case

    Fire and smoke rise from a chemical plant following the Smitty’s Supply explosion in Tangipahoa Parish.
    The Advocate recognized attorney Jeff Berniard for representing families impacted by the Smitty’s Supply chemical plant explosion and fire.

    The Advocate recently recognized Attorney Jeff Berniard and the Berniard Law Firm for their role in representing families displaced by the Smitty’s Supply explosion and fire in Tangipahoa Parish. Read the full Advocate article here.

    The feature highlights Berniard’s track record of success in large-scale litigation. Over his career, he has served as class counsel and lead counsel in numerous high-profile cases, including lawsuits involving chemical leaks, defective products, insurance bad faith practices, and environmental disasters.

    His legal experience includes being appointed to plaintiff steering committees and class counsel roles in major cases such as:

    • Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill (MDL 2179) – Representing victims of one of the largest environmental disasters in U.S. history.

    • Chinese Drywall Litigation (MDL 2047) – Representing homeowners across Louisiana and beyond who faced toxic building materials.

    • Insurance Bad Faith Class Actions – Representing over 70,000 policyholders after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

    The Advocate’s recognition underscores the trust that courts, the media, and affected families place in Berniard’s ability to advocate for justice in the aftermath of industrial and environmental disasters.

    “Our mission has always been to stand up for people against powerful companies and insurers,” Berniard said. “Being recognized in The Advocate for our work on behalf of Tangipahoa Parish residents is a reminder of why we fight these battles every day.”

    You can contact the Berniard Law Firm’s office today to talk about your legal rights as a result of the Smitty’s Fire and lawsuits. Call our office today at 504-521-6000.

    See Also: Attorney Jeff Berniard Featured on WGNO for Leadership in Smitty’s Supply Class Action Lawsuit

    What You Need to Know About the Smitty’s Supply Explosion and Fire in Tangipahoa Parish

  • Community Concerns After the Smitty’s Supply Explosion in Tangipahoa Parish

    Thick smoke and flames rising from the Smitty’s Supply lubricant plant in Roseland, Tangipahoa Parish, after the August 22, 2025 explosion and fire.The Smitty’s Supply plant explosion and fire in Roseland, Louisiana on August 22, 2025 has left the Tangipahoa Parish community shaken. Families were forced to evacuate, businesses were disrupted, and questions remain about the long-term impact of the disaster.

    While officials report that the fire is largely contained, many residents are still facing uncertainty—about their health, their homes, and their future.


    What Residents Experienced

    • Evacuations: Homes, schools, and businesses within a one-mile radius were evacuated immediately.

    • Environmental Fallout: Thick smoke and oily rainfall blanketed the area, leaving behind property damage and health concerns.

    • Lingering Worry: Even after the fire was 90% contained, many locals expressed concerns about possible chemical exposure and contamination of soil or water.


    Why This Matters

    Large-scale industrial accidents don’t just end when the flames go out. They can cause:

    • Respiratory or health issues from chemical exposure.

    • Property damage that requires costly repairs or cleanup.

    • Financial hardship due to missed work, medical bills, or temporary displacement.

    • Stress and uncertainty for families forced to leave their homes.

    These are not just inconveniences—they can have long-lasting effects.


    Do You Have Legal Options?

    If negligence played a role in the Smitty’s Supply fire, those responsible may be held accountable. Victims of this disaster may have legal claims for:

    • Medical expenses

    • Property cleanup or repair costs

    • Lost income

    • Emotional distress

    • Wrongful death claims (in the most tragic cases)


    Our Commitment to Tangipahoa Parish

    As a Louisiana-based law firm, we care deeply about protecting the rights of our neighbors. Our attorneys are already reviewing the situation at Smitty’s Supply and are prepared to investigate potential claims on behalf of affected families and workers.

    We will work tirelessly to:

    • Identify responsible parties

    • Secure fair compensation for victims

    • Provide compassionate support during this difficult time


    Contact Us for Help

    If you or someone you love was impacted by the Smitty’s Supply explosion in Tangipahoa Parish, don’t wait to get answers.

    📞 Call us today at 504-521-6000 or fill out our [contact form] for a free consultation.

    You don’t have to face this alone—we are here to stand by you.

  • When Accidents Happen: The Limits of a Homeowner’s Liability for a Child’s Injury

    A tragic accident involving a young boy with autism has raised questions about the legal responsibility of homeowners when someone is injured on their property. The case of Justin Stollenwerck v. Robert Schweggman, Jr., et al. explores the boundaries of a homeowner’s duty of care, especially when the injured party is the guest of a tenant. This blog post examines the case details and the court’s ruling, shedding light on the complexities of premises liability law.

    The Accident:

    Ryse Stollenwerck, a five-year-old boy with autism, was severely injured while playing at his mother’s boyfriend’s house. The boyfriend, Robert Schweggman Jr., was spinning another child around when they accidentally struck Ryse, causing serious injuries that left him wheelchair-bound and unable to speak.

    Ryse’s father sued Schweggman and the homeowner, John Ehret, claiming negligence. They argued that Ehret, who lived in Texas and rarely visited the Louisiana property, was negligent in allowing Schweggman and his son to play unsupervised, leading to Ryse’s injuries. They also suggested that Ehret, knowing Schweggman’s employment history, should have been aware that he was not equipped to care for a young autistic child.

    Ehret moved for summary judgment, arguing that he owed no duty to Ryse and had no obligation to supervise Schweggman or the children.

    The trial court granted Ehret’s motion for summary judgment, and the Court of Appeal upheld the ruling. The court emphasized that homeowners generally have no duty to protect others from the actions of third parties unless a “special relationship” exists, such as parent-child or employer-employee. In this case, no such relationship existed between Ehret and Schweggman. The court also noted that Ehret was unaware that Ryse and his mother were living in the house and had no knowledge of Schweggman’s activities with the children.

    Key Takeaways:

    This case highlights several important legal principles:

    • Limited Duty of Care for Homeowners: Homeowners are not automatically responsible for injuries that occur on their property, especially when caused by the actions of third parties.
    • Special Relationships and Duty to Protect: A duty to protect others from harm arises only in specific relationships, such as parent-child or employer-employee.
    • Foreseeability and Negligence: A homeowner can be held liable for negligence if the injury was foreseeable and they failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it. However, in this case, the court found that Ehret had no reason to foresee the accident.

    Conclusion:

    The Stollenwerck case serves as a reminder of the limitations of a homeowner’s liability for injuries occurring on their property. While the outcome is undoubtedly heartbreaking for the Stollenwerck family, it reinforces the legal principle that homeowners are not automatically responsible for the actions of others on their premises.

    Written By Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Articles on Homeowner’s Liability: Homeowner Liability Insurance Coverage Upheld for Harmful Accident and What happens if a roofer is injured while putting a new roof on your house?

  • Louisiana Medical Malpractice: When the Mailbox Rule Doesn’t Deliver

    Filing a medical malpractice claim in Louisiana involves navigating a complex process, including meeting strict deadlines. One crucial step is timely paying the filing fee to the Patient’s Compensation Fund Oversight Board (PCF Board). But does the “mailbox rule” apply to these payments? A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal case, In re: Medical Malpractice Review Panel Proceedings of Tiffany Anderson, grappled with this question, highlighting the importance of understanding the nuances of the law and the potential consequences of missed deadlines.

    Tiffany Anderson’s Case:

    Tiffany Anderson filed a request for a medical review panel with the PCF Board alleging medical malpractice. She mailed the required filing fee within the 45-day deadline, but the payment was not received by the PCF Board until after the deadline. The PCF Board declared her claim invalid, and the district court upheld this decision. Anderson appealed.

    The Court’s Decision:

    The Court of Appeal reversed the lower court’s ruling, stating that the “mailbox rule” should apply to filing fees. This rule generally states that a mailed document is considered filed on the date it’s mailed, not the date it’s received. The court reasoned that the law doesn’t specify whether “to pay” means the payment must be received or merely mailed within the deadline. In such cases, they favored the interpretation that preserves the claim.

    Dissenting Opinion:

    However, there was a dissenting opinion. Judge McDonald argued that the plain meaning of “to pay to the board” implies receipt of the payment, not just mailing it. He cited previous cases supporting this interpretation and expressed concern that applying the mailbox rule could circumvent the 45-day deadline. He also pointed to recent legislative changes suggesting a trend towards a “date of receipt” requirement.

    Key Takeaways:

    This case emphasizes the following crucial points:

    • Strict Deadlines in Medical Malpractice Claims: The Louisiana medical malpractice process involves strict deadlines. Missing any of them can have serious consequences for your claim.
    • The Mailbox Rule & Its Limitations: While the mailbox rule generally applies to filing legal documents, its applicability to payments like filing fees can be less clear.
    • Importance of Legal Counsel: Navigating the complexities of medical malpractice claims requires experienced legal guidance. An attorney can help you understand the deadlines, ensure timely filings, and advocate for your rights.

    The Tiffany Anderson case serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to all deadlines in medical malpractice claims. While the court’s decision in this case favored the plaintiff, the dissenting opinion and other legal precedents highlight the potential risks of relying solely on the mailbox rule for payments. When in doubt, it’s always best to err on the side of caution and ensure your payments are received by the deadline.

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Blog Articles on Medical Malpractice and Prescription Issues: Louisiana Court Upholds Prescription in Wrongful Death Suit, Highlights Joint Tortfeasor Rule and Grieving Widow Granted Opportunity to Fight Prescription in Medical Malpractice Case

  • Car Insurance Exclusions: The Battle Between Intent and Fine Print

    Car insurance policies can be riddled with complex terms and conditions, often leading to misunderstandings between policyholders and insurers. The case of Mandi and Abigail Ardda v. Danielle T. Peters, et al. brings this issue to the forefront, highlighting the challenges of navigating insurance exclusions and the importance of clear communication.

    The Accident and the Insurance Claim:

    Abigail Ardda was involved in a car accident while driving a car she co-owned with her husband, Mandi. They filed a claim with their insurer, GoAuto Insurance Company, but were shocked to discover Abigail was listed as an excluded driver, despite their belief that she was covered.

    The Dispute:

    The Arddas claimed they had explicitly instructed the GoAuto agent to include Abigail on the policy and had even paid an additional premium for her coverage. They argued that the exclusion was a result of a mistake by the GoAuto employee and sought to have the policy reformed to reflect their original intent.

    The Court’s Decision:

    The trial court initially ruled in favor of GoAuto, stating that the exclusion was clear and unambiguous. However, the Court of Appeal reversed this decision, stating that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding whether a mutual error had occurred. The case was remanded for further proceedings to determine the true intent of the parties.

    Key Takeaways:

    This case underscores the following important points:

    • Read your policy carefully: It’s crucial to review your insurance policy thoroughly and understand its terms, including any exclusions. Don’t hesitate to ask your agent for clarification if anything is unclear.
    • Document your interactions with your insurer: Keep records of all conversations, emails, and other communications with your insurance agent or company. This can be valuable evidence if a dispute arises later.
    • Don’t rely solely on verbal agreements: While verbal assurances from your agent are important, make sure they are reflected in your written policy. If there’s a discrepancy, address it immediately.
    • Seek legal help if necessary: If you believe your insurer has made an error or is acting in bad faith, consult with an attorney who specializes in insurance law.

    The Ardda’s case serves as a reminder that insurance policies are contracts and should accurately reflect the agreement between the insured and the insurer. When misunderstandings arise, it’s important to seek resolution and, if necessary, legal recourse to protect your rights. Remember, the fine print matters, but so does your intent.

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

    Additional Berniard Law Firm Blog Articles on Car Insurance Contracts: What happens if you are involved in a car accident where your damages exceed the auto insurance policy limits of the person responsible? and Understanding Insurance Exclusions: A Case of Property Damage Coverage for Borrowed Cars

  • Sewage Spill Showdown: Cedar Lodge’s Fight for Justice Against Fairway View Apartments

    A picturesque pond, once teeming with life, transformed into a murky, foul-smelling mess. The culprit? Alleged sewage contamination from a neighboring apartment complex. This is the story of Cedar Lodge Plantation’s battle against Fairway View Apartments in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, a legal fight that highlights the complexities of environmental disputes and property damage claims.

    The Contamination Crisis:

    In 2012, Cedar Lodge discovered their pond had been contaminated with sewage, evidenced by high levels of fecal coliform bacteria. The source was traced back to the adjacent Fairway View Apartments. Cedar Lodge’s plans to develop their property into a residential and commercial community were shattered, leading them to sue the apartment owners and their sewage treatment contractor.

    Legal Twists and Turns:

    • Expert Witness Drama: The district court initially excluded Cedar Lodge’s environmental expert, Suresh Sharma, from testifying. This decision was later overturned on appeal, except for opinions related to specific federal standards.

    • Summary Judgment for the Defendants: The district court granted summary judgment to Fairway View Apartments, dismissing Cedar Lodge’s claims. The court reasoned that there was insufficient evidence of damage, even though contamination had occurred.

    • Appeal and Partial Reversal: The Court of Appeals partially reversed the district court’s decision, finding that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding Cedar Lodge’s negligence and nuisance claims. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

    Key Takeaways:

    • Environmental Disputes and Property Rights: This case underscores the importance of environmental responsibility and the rights of property owners to be free from contamination caused by neighboring entities.

    • The Role of Expert Witnesses: The admissibility of expert testimony can significantly impact the outcome of a case. The appeals court’s decision to allow Sharma’s testimony demonstrates the importance of carefully evaluating an expert’s qualifications and the relevance of their opinions.

    • Damages in Environmental Cases: Determining damages in environmental cases can be complex. While regulatory standards are important, they don’t necessarily dictate the extent of damages a property owner can recover.

    The Fight Continues: The legal battle between Cedar Lodge and Fairway View is far from over. The case has been remanded to the district court, where a jury will decide whether Fairway View is liable and what damages, if any, should be awarded to Cedar Lodge.

    Additional Sources: CEDAR LODGE PLANTATION, L.L.C., v. CSHV FAIRWAY VIEW I, L.L.C.; CSHV FAIRWAY VIEW II, L.L.C.; CAMPUS ADVANTAGE, INCORPORATED; SEWER TREATMENT SPECIALISTS, L.L.C.,

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Blog Articles on Toxic Spills: Petroleum Corporation Releases Millions of Gallons of Toxins Harming Many in Calcasieu Parish and Appellate Court Affirms Trial Court’s Approval of Settlement Agreement in Property Contamination Lawsuit

  • Too Late to Sue: Court Upholds Prescription in Construction Site Injury Case

    In a ruling emphasizing the critical importance of adhering to legal deadlines, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, affirmed the dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit due to prescription, leaving the injured plaintiff without recourse. In the case, the court affirmed a trial court judgment that dismissed Tammy Blanchard’s personal injury claims due to prescription or the expiration of the time limit for filing a lawsuit.

    In 2015, Ms. Blanchard filed a lawsuit alleging she was injured while walking on a grassy pathway to Gerry’s Place, a business in Jefferson Parish. She claimed she tripped over concrete debris left by contractors working on a nearby drainage canal project. The initial lawsuit named several defendants, including Gerry’s Place, Jefferson Parish entities, and an unnamed contractor referred to as “ABC Contractors.”

    Later, Ms. Blanchard amended her petition to add Fleming Construction Company, LLC, and Shavers-Whittle Construction, LLC, as defendants after discovering their involvement in the construction project. However, these amended petitions were filed more than a year after the injury occurred.

    The Issue of Prescription

    Fleming and Shavers-Whittle filed an exception to prescription, arguing that the claims against them were time-barred because the amended petitions were filed beyond the one-year prescriptive period for personal injury cases in Louisiana. Ms. Blanchard countered, invoking the doctrine of contra non valentine, which can suspend the running of prescriptions under certain circumstances.

    Trial Court’s Ruling

    The trial court granted the exception of prescription, dismissing the claims against Fleming and Shavers-Whittle. It reasoned that the amended petitions were filed too late and that Ms. Blanchard failed to demonstrate that she exercised reasonable diligence in identifying and naming the correct defendants within the prescriptive period.

    Court of Appeal’s Affirmation

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision. It emphasized that once a petition is prescribed on its face, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that prescription has been suspended or interrupted. In this case, Ms. Blanchard failed to provide sufficient evidence to support her claim of contra non valentem.  

    The court noted publicly available information about the construction project and the involved contractors. Ms. Blanchard could have exercised reasonable diligence to identify the correct parties within the one-year prescriptive period. Her failure to do so resulted in her claims being time-barred.

    Key Takeaways

    This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of adhering to legal deadlines. In Louisiana, the prescriptive period for personal injury cases is one year. If you fail to file your lawsuit within this timeframe, you may lose your right to seek compensation for your injuries.

    The doctrine of contra non valentine can potentially suspend prescriptions under certain circumstances, such as when the plaintiff is prevented from filing suit due to factors beyond their control. However, the plaintiff must demonstrate that they exercised reasonable diligence in pursuing their claim.   

    If you have been injured, it is critical to consult with an attorney as soon as possible to ensure that your legal rights are protected and that you file your lawsuit within the applicable prescriptive period. Delaying legal action can have severe consequences, as illustrated in this case.

    Remember: Time is of the essence in personal injury cases. Don’t let the clock run out on your right to seek justice.

    Additional Sources: Tammy Blanchard v. Gerry’s Place, Inc., et al.,

    Written By Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Articles on Prescription: Louisiana Court Upholds Prescription in Wrongful Death Suit, Highlights Joint Tortfeasor Rule and The Clock is Ticking: Understanding Prescription in Louisiana Personal Injury Cases

  • Louisiana Court Grapples with Complexities of Adoption in Wrongful Death Case

    A recent ruling by the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, has shed light on the complex interplay between adoption and the right to file wrongful death and survival actions. The consolidated cases, stemming from a tragic car accident that claimed the lives of Richard Stewart, Jr., and his two minor children, raised questions about whether adopted children and biological half-siblings can pursue such claims.

    The accident resulted in the deaths of Richard Stewart, Jr., and his two minor children. Mr. Stewart was survived by his wife, Lisa Stewart, and two adult sons, Daniel Goins and David Watts, who were adopted as minors. Additionally, the deceased minor children had a biological mother, Brandi Hardie, who was not a party to the lawsuits.

    Following the accident, multiple survival and wrongful death actions were filed. The central issue was whether Goins and Watts, as adopted children and biological half-siblings, had the right to bring these claims.

    The trial court denied the defendants’ exceptions of no right of action, allowing Goins and Watts to pursue their claims. The court reasoned that biological relationships and dependency, rather than legal classifications, should determine a child’s rights in such cases.

    The Court of Appeal, in a split decision, granted the defendants’ exceptions of no right of action concerning Goins’ claims for the deaths of his biological father and half-siblings. The majority concluded that adoption terminates the legal relationship between the adopted child and their biological parents, barring them from pursuing wrongful death claims.

    Judges Cooks and Savoie dissented, arguing that the Louisiana Civil Code articles governing wrongful death and survival actions do not exclude adopted children or half-siblings. They emphasized the importance of biological relationships and the potential unconstitutionality of denying adopted children the right to file such claims.

    Judge Conery concurred in part and dissented in part, agreeing with the dissenters regarding the inclusion of adopted children and half-siblings but disagreeing on the specific outcome of the case. He highlighted the need for the biological mother of the deceased minor children to be included in the proceedings to determine her potential abandonment and its impact on the siblings’ right to sue.

    This case illustrates the legal complexities surrounding adoption and inheritance rights in the context of wrongful death and survival actions. It underscores the ongoing debate about the balance between biological and legal relationships in determining who can seek compensation for the loss of a loved one.

    The dissenting opinions raise important questions about the potential implications of excluding adopted children from pursuing wrongful death claims, particularly concerning their constitutional rights.

    As the law continues to evolve in this area, it is crucial for individuals involved in adoption or facing the tragic loss of a loved one to seek legal counsel to understand their rights and navigate the complexities of the legal system.

    Additional Sources: KHRISTY GOINS RISMILLER, TUTRIX FOR DANIEL EDWARDS GOINS VERSUS GEMINI INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Articles on Who Has a Right to Bring a Lawsuit: Louisiana Court holds that tutors are not considered a “parent” entitled to bring a claim for loss of consortium and Biological Father Denied Claim in Son’s Louisiana Wrongful Death LawSuit

  • Louisiana Court Adjusts Damages in Car Accident Case, Emphasizes Need for General Damages

    A recent ruling by the Louisiana Court of Appeal has highlighted the importance of awarding general damages in personal injury cases, even when the primary focus is on medical expenses. The case involved a car accident where the jury awarded the plaintiff past medical expenses but failed to award any general damages for pain and suffering.

    In 2013, Steven McDowell was involved in a car accident with Russell Diggs. McDowell sued Diggs and his insurer, seeking damages for physical and mental pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and medical expenses.

    The jury found both drivers equally at fault (50% each) and awarded McDowell $8,000 for past medical expenses. However, they did not award any general damages. McDowell appealed, arguing that it was legal error to award special damages without also awarding general damages.

    The Court of Appeal agreed with McDowell, finding that the jury’s decision to award medical expenses but no general damages was an abuse of discretion. The court conducted a de novo review of the evidence and awarded McDowell an additional $25,000 in general damages.

    Understanding the Types of Damages

    • Special Damages: These are quantifiable economic losses, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and property damage.
    • General Damages: These are non-economic losses that are more difficult to quantify, such as pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life.

    Why General Damages Matter:

    General damages compensate for the intangible harms caused by an accident. They acknowledge the physical and emotional toll an injury can take on a person’s life. Even if medical expenses are covered, the pain, suffering, and reduced quality of life deserve compensation.

    Key Takeaways from the Case:

    • Legal Error: The court emphasized that it’s a legal error for a jury to award special damages without also awarding general damages when the injuries are proven.
    • De Novo Review: When such an error occurs, the appellate court can conduct a de novo review, meaning they will independently assess the evidence and determine an appropriate award for general damages.
    • Importance of General Damages: The case highlights that general damages are an essential component of fair compensation in personal injury cases.
    • Seek Legal Counsel: If you’ve been injured in an accident, it’s crucial to consult with an attorney who can help you understand your rights and ensure you receive full and fair compensation for all your losses, including general damages.

    This case serves as a reminder that even in cases where medical expenses are the primary focus, general damages for pain and suffering should not be overlooked. The court’s decision emphasizes the importance of ensuring that injured individuals receive just compensation for the full spectrum of harm they’ve suffered.

    Additional Sources: STEVEN MCDOWELL VERSUS RUSSELL DIGGS, UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION AND LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law firm articles on General Damages: Louisiana Court Affirms General Damages Awarded to Ascension Parish Woman Injured In Auto Accident and Falling Tree Victim Entitled to Increase of General Damages