gets.primecure.net

Tag: Louisiana Law

  • The Clock of Justice: When Do Louisiana Laws Take Effect?

    Golden clock face featuring the outline of Louisiana at its center, symbolizing the timing and application of laws, with black Roman numerals and antique gold detailing.Understanding When Louisiana Laws Apply: A Guide to Prospective and Retroactive Effects

    Imagine you’re involved in a legal matter, and the legislature passes a new law. Does it affect your situation? Or does it only apply moving forward?

    The timing of when a law takes effect — and whether it applies to past events — can drastically impact legal outcomes. In Louisiana, this concept is governed by Civil Code Article 6, which establishes when laws apply prospectively (looking forward) or retroactively (looking backward).

    The Rule: Louisiana Civil Code Article 6

    Art. 6. Retroactivity of laws

    In the absence of contrary legislative expression, substantive laws apply prospectively only. Procedural and interpretive laws apply both prospectively and retroactively, unless there is a legislative expression to the contrary.

    In other words, new laws usually apply only to future actions — but in certain cases, they can apply to past events depending on their nature.

    The General Rule: Laws Look Forward (Prospective Application)

    Most laws in Louisiana are prospective, meaning they only govern future conduct.

    This principle ensures fairness and predictability: people cannot be punished or have their rights altered by a rule that didn’t exist at the time of their actions.

    Think of it like a new rulebook for a game: the new rules apply to future matches, not the ones already played.

    Prospective laws are also known as substantive laws, because they establish new legal rights, duties, or obligations — and by default, they only apply moving forward.

    When Laws Look Backward: Interpretive Laws (Retroactive Application)

    There are, however, exceptions. One major exception involves interpretive laws — laws that don’t create new rules, but instead clarify what an existing law already meant.

    Because interpretive laws explain rather than change, they apply retroactively. They’re treated as though they’ve been part of the original law from the start.

    For example:
    If a property law used the term “adjacent” and its meaning was disputed, an interpretive law that clarifies “adjacent” would apply to past and present cases alike. It doesn’t create a new right — it simply explains the legislature’s original intent.

    Procedural Laws: The Mechanics of Justice

    Another key exception is procedural law — the set of rules that governs how legal cases are handled rather than what rights exist.

    Procedural laws might involve:

    • Filing deadlines

    • Evidence rules

    • Court procedures

    Because procedural laws are about method, not substance, they often apply both prospectively and retroactively — even to ongoing cases.

    The idea is to keep the judicial process efficient and uniform, ensuring fairness for everyone currently in the system.

    Why This Matters to You

    Understanding when a law applies can make a world of difference. It determines:

    • Whether a new law impacts your case

    • How courts will interpret older disputes

    • Whether you can rely on a previous legal rule or practice

    If a law changes midstream — or if new clarifications are made — knowing whether it applies to your situation is vital to protecting your rights.

    Because the nuances between substantive, procedural, and interpretive laws are subtle, consulting an experienced Louisiana attorney can help ensure your case is interpreted correctly.

    The Bottom Line: Timing Is Everything

    Louisiana’s Civil Code strikes a careful balance:

    • Substantive laws: usually prospective only

    • Procedural laws: generally retroactive and prospective

    • Interpretive laws: typically retroactive

    This approach ensures fairness while allowing the legal system to evolve and clarify itself over time.

    Need Legal Guidance?

    If you’re unsure whether a new or amended law affects your case, Berniard Law Firm can help.

    Our attorneys are well-versed in Louisiana’s Civil Code and can explain whether Article 6 applies to your specific situation.

    Other Berniard Law Firm Articles on Legal Matters: Ignorance of the Law: Why “I Didn’t Know” Isn’t a Defense in Louisiana

    and

    Who’s Responsible When a Step Collapses?

  • When the Law Is Silent: How Louisiana Judges Uphold Justice

    Bronze scales of justice labeled Justice, Equity, and Reason beside a wooden gavel on a judge’s bench in a traditional Louisiana courtroom, symbolizing fairness and judicial decision-making when the law is silent.The Unforeseen Gaps: Why Laws Can’t Cover Everything

    Imagine Louisiana’s laws as a vast, detailed tapestry woven to guide every aspect of daily life. Even so, no legal system — no matter how comprehensive — can anticipate every possible situation.

    So, what happens when a dispute arises in court, and no written statute or established custom directly applies?

    This is where Louisiana Civil Code Article 4 comes into play. It ensures that justice never stops simply because the law is silent. Instead, it empowers judges to decide cases based on equity, guided by reason, justice, and prevailing usages.

    The Foundation: Louisiana Civil Code Article 4

    Art. 4. Absence of legislation or custom

    When no rule for a particular situation can be derived from legislation or custom, the court is bound to proceed according to equity. To decide equitably, resort is made to justice, reason, and prevailing usages.

    This article defines how Louisiana judges must act when no existing law or custom applies. Rather than leaving cases unresolved, it gives courts both the authority and duty to make equitable decisions that reflect fairness and common sense.

    Beyond the Written Word: Applying Equity, Reason, and Custom

    Equity

    Equity is the principle of fairness — ensuring that justice is achieved even when no statute directly governs the issue. Judges apply equitable reasoning to avoid unjust results that strict legal interpretation might otherwise produce.

    Natural Law and Reason

    When judges appeal to natural law, they turn to universal principles of right and wrong that transcend written rules. Reason ensures that these decisions are logical, balanced, and grounded in moral understanding and societal norms.

    Prevailing Usages

    If no written law or clear precedent exists, prevailing usages — long-established customs or community practices — may help fill the gap. When a certain practice has been consistently observed and accepted as fair, it can serve as a guide for judicial decision-making.

    Why This Matters to You

    For Louisiana citizens, Article 4 is more than just a procedural rule — it’s a safeguard of fairness. It ensures that:

    • No one is left without a remedy. Even when legislation is silent, courts must act.

    • Justice adapts to real life. Courts use equity and reason to handle unique, unforeseen cases.

    • Fairness prevails. Judges consider moral and social principles to ensure outcomes align with justice.

    This article highlights that Louisiana’s judges are not mere “law readers” — they are interpreters of justice, entrusted to apply both law and logic where needed.

    The Human Element in Law

    Article 4 underscores the civil law tradition’s flexibility. It recognizes that law is not static — it must evolve and respond to the complexities of human life.
    By requiring courts to apply equity, Louisiana ensures that compassion and fairness remain at the core of its legal system.

    Navigating the Nuances of Louisiana Law

    Understanding how courts interpret the Civil Code when statutes are silent is essential for anyone facing a unique or unclear legal issue. Whether your case involves property rights, contracts, or personal disputes, principles of equity and reason could shape the outcome.

    Need Legal Guidance?

    When the law doesn’t provide a clear answer, Berniard Law Firm can help.
    Our experienced attorneys understand how Louisiana’s Civil Code — including Article 4 — applies to modern cases.

    📞 Contact us today for a consultation. We’re here to ensure that fairness, justice, and reason guide every step of your case.

    Other Berniard Law Firm Articles:Louisiana Law: Absence of Legislation or Custom — Understanding Civil Code Article 4

    and Understanding How Louisiana Laws Are Interpreted: Clear Language vs. Purpose

  • Legislation vs. Custom: Unpacking the Foundations of Louisiana Law

    Golden scales of justice balanced over a Louisiana state outline with law books and the State Capitol in the background, symbolizing the relationship between legislation and custom in Louisiana’s Civil Law systemThe Building Blocks of Justice: How Louisiana Laws Are Made

    Louisiana’s legal system is unique, drawing heavily from its Civil Code tradition. Unlike many other states that primarily rely on ‘common law’ (judge-made law), our system is rooted in comprehensive written statutes. But where do these rules come from, and how do we interpret them? Understanding the foundational principles of Louisiana law, as laid out in the Louisiana Civil Code, is key to knowing your rights and obligations.

    Legislation: The Primary Source of Our Laws (Louisiana Civil Code Article 2)

    When we talk about laws in Louisiana, we primarily refer to legislation. Civil Code Article 2 clearly defines legislation as “a solemn expression of legislative will.” In simple terms, this means the laws formally passed by our elected representatives in the Louisiana Legislature and signed by the Governor. These are the statutes, codes, and acts that govern everything from contracts and property to family matters and personal injury. They are written, publicly available, and intended to provide clear guidance for citizens and courts alike.

    The Role of Custom: An Important, But Secondary, Source (Louisiana Civil Code Article 1)

    While legislation is paramount, Civil Code Article 1 acknowledges another source of law: custom. But what exactly is a legal custom? It’s not just “how things have always been done.” Legally, a custom refers to practices that have been long-established, consistently observed, and widely accepted by the community as having the force of law. For a custom to be legally recognized, it usually needs to be reasonable, known, and consistent. Think of certain business practices or local traditions that, over time, become an unwritten rule that people generally follow and expect others to follow.

    When Legislation and Custom Meet: Legislation Always Prevails (Louisiana Civil Code Article 3)

    This brings us to a crucial point, brilliantly clarified by Louisiana Civil Code Article 3: “Customs may not abrogate legislation.” This short, powerful statement is incredibly important. It means that while customs can be a source of law, they can never override, repeal, or nullify a written law passed by the legislature. If there’s a specific statute on the books, no matter how widespread a custom might be, the legislation always takes precedence.

    For example, imagine a neighborhood where everyone has, for years, informally agreed to park their cars on the sidewalk on weekends. If a new city ordinance is passed explicitly prohibiting sidewalk parking, the long-standing custom of parking there would immediately be overridden by the new legislation. The custom, no matter how ingrained, cannot abrogate (cancel out) the written law.

    Why This Matters to You

    Understanding the hierarchy of legal sources in Louisiana is vital. It means that when you have a legal question or dispute, the first place to look is always to the written law – the legislation. Customs can offer context or fill in gaps where legislation is silent, but they can never contradict it. This principle ensures consistency, predictability, and fairness in our legal system, preventing uncertainty that could arise if unwritten traditions could simply undo formal laws.

    Need Legal Guidance? Contact Us Today.

    Navigating the intricacies of Louisiana law can be complex, even for seemingly straightforward situations. Whether you’re dealing with a contract dispute, property issue, or any other legal challenge, understanding how legislation and custom apply to your specific case is critical. Don’t rely on assumptions or “how things have always been done.” Our experienced legal team is here to provide clarity and protect your interests. Contact us today for a consultation to discuss your legal needs.

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

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

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

  • Stairway to Dismissal: Missed Deadline Leads to Summary Judgment in Injury Case

    This case focuses on the procedural aspects of a personal injury lawsuit, highlighting the importance of deadlines and the consequences of missing them.

    Case Background

    Charles and Jeri Kouba sued the City of Natchitoches after Mr. Kouba fell on a staircase owned by the city. They alleged a defect in the staircase caused his injuries. The City filed a motion for summary judgment, which the Koubas opposed. However, they missed the deadline to file their opposition and requested a continuance (postponement) of the hearing. The trial court denied their request and granted summary judgment in favor of the City.

    Motion to Continue

    The Koubas argued that they needed more time to gather evidence and expert opinions to oppose the summary judgment motion. However, the appeals court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of their continuance request. Here’s why:

    • Missed Deadline: The Koubas missed the statutory deadline to file their opposition to the summary judgment motion.
    • Purpose of Continuance: The court explained that the purpose of allowing continuances in summary judgment proceedings is to give parties time to comply with deadlines, not to excuse missed deadlines.
    • Lack of Good Cause: The Koubas’ reason for missing the deadline was their attorney’s calendaring error, which the court did not consider a sufficient “good cause” for a continuance.

    Summary Judgment

    The court then reviewed the summary judgment ruling itself, applying the same standards as the trial court:

    • Burden of Proof: The City, as the moving party, had the burden to show that there was no genuine issue of material fact.
    • Premises Liability: In Louisiana, to hold a public entity liable for an injury on its property, a plaintiff must prove several elements, including that the property was defective, the defect posed an unreasonable risk of harm, and the entity had notice of the defect.
    • Lack of Evidence: The court found that the Koubas failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the City’s knowledge of any defect in the staircase.

    Exclusion of Evidence

    The Koubas also argued that the trial court erred in excluding photographs they attempted to introduce. However, the court found no error because the Koubas had missed the deadline to file these photographs with their opposition to the summary judgment.

    Key Takeaways

    • Deadlines Matter: Meeting procedural deadlines is crucial in legal proceedings. Failure to do so can have serious consequences.
    • Summary Judgment Standards: Summary judgment can be a powerful tool to resolve cases efficiently when there are no genuine factual disputes.
    • Premises Liability: Proving a premises liability claim against a public entity requires evidence of a defect, an unreasonable risk of harm, and the entity’s knowledge of the defect.

    Outcome

    The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s decision, upholding the denial of the continuance and the grant of summary judgment in favor of the City. This case underscores the importance of diligence in meeting procedural deadlines and the necessity of presenting sufficient evidence to survive a summary judgment motion.

  • Medical Malpractice Claim Fails: No Expert Testimony to Support Allegations

    The following case highlights the critical role of expert testimony in medical malpractice lawsuits and the difficulty of succeeding on such claims without it.

    Case Background

    Claire James sued Dr. Shahed Jameel, alleging that his negligent care caused the death of her mother, Laura James. However, a Medical Review Panel had previously reviewed the case and found no breach of the standard of care by Dr. Jameel. Despite this, Claire proceeded with her lawsuit. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Dr. Jameel, and Claire appealed.

    Medical Malpractice in Louisiana

    To succeed in a medical malpractice claim in Louisiana, a plaintiff must prove:

    1. Standard of Care: The degree of care and skill expected of a healthcare provider in the same or similar circumstances.
    2. Breach of Duty: The healthcare provider’s actions fell below the accepted standard of care.
    3. Injury: The patient suffered an injury.
    4. Causation: The healthcare provider’s breach of duty directly caused the patient’s injury.

    The Importance of Expert Testimony

    Expert testimony is crucial in medical malpractice cases because it helps the court understand complex medical issues and determine whether the standard of care was breached. Without expert testimony, it’s often impossible for a layperson (judge or jury) to make that determination.

    The Court’s Analysis

    The appeals court reviewed the case and focused on the lack of expert testimony to support Claire’s claims. Here’s what they considered:

    • Medical Review Panel: The panel, consisting of medical experts, unanimously found no breach of the standard of care by Dr. Jameel.
    • Plaintiff’s Evidence: Claire failed to present any expert testimony to contradict the panel’s findings or support her allegations of negligence.
    • Tangential Evidence: The only expert opinion Claire offered was from a panel member who criticized a different doctor’s actions, not Dr. Jameel’s.

    The court emphasized that without expert testimony to establish a breach of the standard of care, Claire could not meet her burden of proof in a medical malpractice case.

    Key Takeaways

    • Medical Review Panel: The opinion of a Medical Review Panel carries significant weight in Louisiana malpractice cases.
    • Expert Testimony is Essential: Without expert testimony, it’s very difficult to win a medical malpractice lawsuit, especially when the medical issues are complex.
    • Summary Judgment: If a plaintiff fails to produce expert evidence to support their claims, the defendant is likely to succeed on a motion for summary judgment.

    Outcome

    The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s decision, granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Jameel. This case illustrates the high bar plaintiffs face in medical malpractice cases and the necessity of expert testimony to establish a breach of the standard of care.

  • Power Lines and Damaged Crops: Who Pays When Farming Meets Infrastructure?

    The following case revolves around the intersection of farming and infrastructure development, and the legal implications when construction activities impact agricultural land.

    Case Background

    Lanie Farms, a sugarcane and soybean farming operation, sued CLECO Power and its contractor, Highlines, for damages caused during the construction of new power lines across the farmland. Lanie Farms claimed that the construction activities damaged their crops and required costly remediation efforts. The trial court ruled in favor of Lanie Farms, awarding them $38,000 in damages. However, Lanie Farms appealed, arguing the award was insufficient. CLECO and Highlines also appealed, claiming the court should have dismissed the case.

    Legal Issues

    The case raised several key legal issues:

    • Measure of Damages: How should the damages to the crops be calculated – based on the gross value of the lost crops or the net value after deducting expenses?
    • Involuntary Dismissal: Did Lanie Farms present sufficient evidence to support their claims and avoid dismissal of their case?
    • Contractual Obligations: Did the servitude agreement between CLECO and the landowners create an obligation for CLECO to pay for damages to Lanie Farms’ crops?

    The Court’s Analysis

    The appeals court reviewed the evidence and addressed each of these issues:

    • Damages: The court acknowledged that while gross value is often used in pre-construction negotiations, this case was different. The court found that the net value, which accounts for expenses, was a more accurate reflection of the actual losses suffered by Lanie Farms.
    • Involuntary Dismissal: Although Lanie Farms primarily argued negligence, they also presented evidence of a contractual obligation by CLECO to pay for damages. The court found this sufficient to deny the motion for involuntary dismissal.
    • Contractual Obligations: The court confirmed that the servitude agreement created a “stipulation pour autrui” – a benefit for a third party (Lanie Farms). This meant CLECO was contractually obligated to compensate Lanie Farms for crop damage caused by their construction activities.

    Key Takeaways

    • Servitude Agreements: When granting servitudes for infrastructure development, landowners and lessees should carefully consider provisions for potential crop damage and ensure clear language regarding liability and compensation.
    • Expert Testimony: Expert witnesses play a crucial role in determining damages, especially in complex cases involving crop valuation and remediation costs.
    • Contractual vs. Negligence Claims: Even when negligence is alleged, the existence of a contractual obligation can significantly impact the outcome of a case.

    Outcome

    The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s decision, upholding the $38,000 damage award. This case demonstrates the importance of contractual agreements in determining liability for crop damage caused by infrastructure development. It also highlights the court’s discretion in assessing damages and the weight given to expert testimony.

  • Who’s Responsible When a Step Collapses?

    The following case deals with a common scenario: a guest gets injured at a business and sues, alleging negligence. But the legal outcome hinges on a crucial factor – whether the business owner knew or should have known about the dangerous condition that caused the injury.

    Case Summary

    Melanie Mark was injured when a wooden step on a cabin staircase collapsed at a KOA campground in Lafayette, Louisiana. She sued KOA, claiming they were negligent in maintaining the property. However, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of KOA, finding that Ms. Mark failed to prove KOA had any knowledge of the defect in the stairs. Ms. Mark appealed this decision.

    Legal Principles

    The court’s decision revolved around Louisiana Civil Code Article 2317.1, which deals with premises liability. Here’s the key takeaway:

    Knowledge is Key: Property owners are only liable for injuries caused by defects if they knew, or should have known, about the defect and failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent the damage.
    The court also considered the duty of care owed by innkeepers to their guests:

    Innkeeper’s Duty: Innkeepers have a heightened duty to ensure their premises are safe and to warn guests of any hidden dangers. This includes conducting reasonable inspections.
    The Court’s Analysis

    The appeals court reviewed the evidence and found no indication that KOA knew or should have known about the rotten step. Here’s why:

    No Prior Complaints: KOA had no record of any prior complaints or issues with the stairs.
    Regular Maintenance and Inspections: KOA conducted regular maintenance and yearly inspections, and no defects were found.
    Hidden Defect: The rot was hidden on the underside of the step, making it difficult to detect even with a reasonable inspection.
    Plaintiff’s Own Testimony: Ms. Mark herself testified that the stairs appeared fine and safe when she used them before the accident.
    Based on this, the court concluded that KOA did not breach its duty of care and was not liable for Ms. Mark’s injuries.

    Important Considerations

    This case highlights some important aspects of premises liability law:

    Burden of Proof: The injured party bears the burden of proving the property owner’s knowledge of the defect.
    Constructive Knowledge: Even if the owner didn’t have actual knowledge, they can still be liable if they should have known about the defect through reasonable care.
    Hidden Defects: Liability is less likely when the defect is hidden and not readily discoverable.
    Outcome

    The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s decision, granting summary judgment in favor of KOA. This means Ms. Mark’s case was dismissed, and she was responsible for the costs of the appeal.

    This case serves as a reminder that proving negligence in premises liability cases requires demonstrating the property owner’s knowledge of the dangerous condition. When a defect is hidden and there’s no evidence the owner knew or should have known about it, it’s difficult to establish liability.

  • 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?

  • 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

  • Subrogation Rights Upheld: Insurer’s Claim Prevails Despite Settlement

    In the realm of insurance claims and legal disputes, the concept of subrogation often plays a crucial role. Subrogation allows an insurer, after paying a claim to its insured, to step into the insured’s shoes and seek reimbursement from the party responsible for the loss. But what happens when the insured settles their claim directly with the at-fault party? Does the insurer lose its right to subrogation? A recent Louisiana Court of Appeals case, Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company v. David Scott Burkett, et al., sheds light on this issue.

    The Accident and the Claim:

    The case stemmed from a car accident where Katherine Burkett, insured by Shelter Mutual Insurance Company, collided with Jessica Hall, insured by Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company. Farm Bureau paid Hall $5,000 for medical expenses under her policy and became subrogated to her claim for that amount.

    The Settlement and the Lawsuit:

    Hall later sued the Burketts and Shelter for her injuries. However, before Farm Bureau could intervene, Hall settled her claim with Shelter for $53,500. Farm Bureau, unaware of the settlement, filed a separate lawsuit against the Burketts and Shelter to recover the $5,000 it had paid to Hall.

    The Trial Court’s Decision:

    The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, stating that Hall’s settlement released them from any further liability, including Farm Bureau’s subrogation claim.

    The Court of Appeals’ Reversal:

    The Court of Appeals reversed this decision. It emphasized that Farm Bureau had notified Shelter of its subrogation claim well before Hall’s settlement. This prior notice prevented the defendants from using the settlement as a shield against Farm Bureau’s claim. The court highlighted that a subrogated insurer has an independent right to pursue reimbursement from the at-fault party, even if the insured has settled their claim.

    Key Takeaways:

    • Timely Notice is Key: Insurers must promptly notify the at-fault party’s insurer of their subrogation interest. This notice protects the insurer’s right to reimbursement, even if the insured later settles their claim.
    • Subrogation is an Independent Right: Subrogation is not dependent on the insured’s actions. An insurer can pursue its subrogation claim even if the insured has settled their claim, as long as the at-fault party was previously notified of the subrogation interest.
    • Understanding Solidary Obligations: In Louisiana, when multiple parties are liable for the same debt, they are considered solidary obligors. This means the creditor (in this case, Farm Bureau) can seek full payment from any of the liable parties.

    The Louisiana Farm Bureau case serves as a crucial reminder for insurers to be proactive in protecting their subrogation rights. Timely notice to the at-fault party is essential to ensure that a subsequent settlement between the insured and the at-fault party does not extinguish the insurer’s right to reimbursement.

    Written by Berniard Law Firm

    Other Berniard Law Firm Blog Articles on Subrogation: Insurance Ruling Upholds Third-Party Fire Damage Claims and Read the Fine Print, Louisiana Court Finds Company Falls With Subrogation Waiver