Blog
Explore news, articles, outcomes, and legal resources by category or practice area.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
deselect
No items found...
Mr. Jones was honored to participate on a panel of well respected Louisiana attorneys and judges to discuss "Overcoming the Obstacles to Attorney Pro Bono Participation."
Products Liability - PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, ––– U.S. –––– , 2011 WL 2472790 (June 23, 2011). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that generic drug manufacturers may not be sued under state law for failing to warn consumers about potential risks associated with their products. The basis of this ruling is that a generic drug manufacturer must use the same warning labels the brand name drug manufacturer used. Therefore, Federal law pre-empted state laws which could impose a duty upon generic drug manufacturers to change drug labeling.Workers’ Compensation - Becker v. Murphy Oil Corporation, 2010-1519 (La.App. 4 Cir. 6/2/11), --- So.3d ----, 2011 WL 2164151. The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld an award of tort damages to employees who suffered gradual hearing loss because of long-term occupational noise exposure. The court found that the exposure was not an "accident" and therefore was not compensable under the Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Act as an occupational disease. Because there was no workers' compensation exposure to the employer, the employer could not benefit from the immunity to tort provided through the workers' compensation laws.LeBlanc v Excel Auto Parts, 2011-58 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/1/11), --- So.3d ----, 2011 WL 2135515. Under LSA-R.S. 23:1201, an insurer’s failure to adhere to mandatory notice provisions when converting a claimant’s longtime disability benefits from temporary total disability (TTD) benefits to supplemental earnings benefits (SEB) may merit the imposition of fees and penalties.Discovery - The recent decision of Lee v. Max Intern., LLC, 638 F.3d 1318 (10th Cir. 2011) shows the discretion given to the district judge in federal court in discovery matters. In Lee, the U. S. Tenth Circuit ruled that a district court has discretion to impose dismissal as a sanction upon a plaintiff who failed to respond to discovery and two court orders to produce documents. The court stated, "[T]hree strikes are more than enough to allow a district court to call a litigant out."
Insurance – The Louisiana Supreme Court recently held that an anti-assignment clause in a homeowner’s policy is not against Louisiana public policy. An anti-assignment clause will be valid in Louisiana if it clearly and unambiguously expresses that it applies to post-loss assignments. However, the issue must be evaluated on a "policy by policy" basis. In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation, 2010-1823 (La. 5/10/11), 2011 WL 1774330.Prescription – The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that a timely lawsuit filed against a principal or statutory employer interrupts prescription against a third party alleged tortfeasor when the parties have a solidary relationship. Glasgow v. PAR Minerals Corp., 2010-2011 (La. 5/10/11), 2011 WL 1759845.Workers Compensation – The Louisiana Third Circuit found that an employer must show "good cause" to change his choice of vocational rehabilitation counselor in a worker's compensation setting. Carmouche v. Kraft Foods, Inc., 10-401 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 4/13/11), 2011 WL 1376146.
Mr. LeBlanc, Board President, also served this year as the marketing director for Big Buddy's largest fundraiser "Dancing for Big Buddy." This event has been dubbed the "premiere social event" for Baton Rouge and took place in April of this year.
Employment Discrimination - The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that retaliation against the fiancé of a party who made a claim for sex discrimination gives rise to a cause of action in favor of the fiancé.In Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP, 131 S. Ct. 863 (2011) an employer allegedly fired an employee's fiancé in response to the employee's filing of a sex discrimination claim against the employer. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the employer's actions would violate the anti-retaliation provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and provide a cause of action for the fiancé against the employer.Premises Liability - The Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that a premises owner is not liable for an open and obvious condition that should have been observed by a patron.In Chambers v. Village of Moreauville, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeals, No. CA 10-1368 (4/6/11), the Court held that because a pedestrian is obligated to observe his path mindful that every sidewalk contains irregularities, a condition that is obvious and easily avoidable cannot be considered to present an unreasonable risk of harm.Insurance - The Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently outlined the scope of an insurance agent's duty to procure coverage for an insured.In JSB Interests, LLC v. Hanover Insurance Company, Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 10-CA-487 (3/9/11), the Court held that an insurance agent's duty to procure insurance coverage requested by an insured does not include a duty to spontaneously identify the insured's needs and advise him regarding additional coverage.
Mr. Golden serves as counsel for Capital Area Legal Services Corp, a nonprofit organization that provides indigent legal service in twelve Louisiana parishes. Mr. Golden served as a spokesperson for the organization in recent articles in The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Judicial Confessions - In Bennett v. Porter, 2010-1088 (La. App. 3 Cir. 3/9/11), --- So.3d ---, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the impact of a judicial confession (i.e., any declaration made by a party in a judicial proceeding) in a subsequent legal proceeding. The Court concluded that, under Civil Code Article 1848, an earlier judicial admission does not bind a party in a later proceeding. Although the judicial confession is admissible into evidence in a subsequent proceeding and may be used for purposes of impeachment, it is not conclusive. Furthermore, it does not create a presumption and does not estop the party making the confession, absent a showing of deception or prejudice.Premises Liability - In Nicholson v. Horseshoe Entertainment, Louisiana Partnership, 46-081 (La. App. 2 Cir. 3/2/11), --- So.3d ---, the plaintiff alleged that an escalator "jerked" and caused her fall and injury. In affirming summary judgment, the Louisiana Second Circuit faithfully applied Article 2317.1 (concerning defects in things) and found that the plaintiff's two affidavits which confirmed her version of events were insufficient to create a "material issue of fact." On appeal, the plaintiff accused the Trial Judge of improperly "weighing" the evidence. However, the Appellate Court found the discussion of a defect irrelevant because the plaintiff possessed no evidence that the defendant knew or should have known of the alleged defect.Products Liability - In Payne v. Gardner, 2010-2627 (La. 2/18/11), --- So.3d ---, the Louisiana Supreme Court upheld summary judgment where the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the alleged injury resulted from a reasonably anticipated use of the manufacturer's product under La. R.S. 9:2800.54(A). The suit involved the ill-conceived, but apparently established practice of attempting to "ride" an oil well pump. The case presented serious injuries. In this setting, the Court ruled that a manufacturer's "knowledge of the potential and actual intentional abuse of its product does not create a question of fact on the question of reasonably anticipated use." The defendant showed that its pumping unit was manufactured solely for the purpose of extracting oil from the ground. The plaintiff possessed no evidence to the contrary. As such, the Court found that no reasonable person could find that the plaintiff's use was reasonably anticipated.
Attorneys Rebecca Klar, Virginia McLin and Kimberly Higginbotham are members of one of the largest women’s associations in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Ms. Higginbotham served the Baton Rouge community this year through her work with the Of Moving Colors Foundation and will work with the "Ghosts of the Castle" exhibit at the Old State Capital this year. Ms. McLin worked with the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation and the Cinderella Project this year and will be the chairperson for upcoming League projects with these organizations. Ms. Klar worked with the Our Lady of the Lake Children’s Hospital and will serve this year as the assistant special events chairperson for the League fundraiser River Road Recipes.
Workers' Compensation - In Rougeau v. Gottson Const. Co., 2010-1082 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2/9/11), --- So. 3d ---, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a sincerely held but unjustified belief that an employee's injury did not result from an accident does not excuse the failure to pay workers' compensation benefits. As such, it was unreasonable for an employer to deny benefits. Attorney fees were awarded against the employer.Insurance - In La Louisiane Bakery Co. Ltd. v. Lafayette Ins. Co., 09-825 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2/8/11), --- So.3d ---, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals approved plaintiff's use of profit and loss statements and tax returns for a twelve month period to define the business interruption claim. The insurance policy did not specify how the business interruption claim was to be calculated. Because the plaintiff's sales figures varied each month, the plaintiff was allowed to introduce documents covering twelve months of business even though the business was only interrupted for six weeks.Workers' Compensation - In Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 2010-0245 (La. 1/19/11), --- So.3d ---, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that an employee did not meet his burden of proving an unwitnessed accident. In its analysis, the Court confirmed that an unwitnessed accident may be proven under Worker's Compensation by the employee's testimony alone only if (1) no other evidence discredits or casts serious doubt upon his version of the accident and (2) the worker's testimony is corroborated by the circumstances following the accident.
Workers Compensation - In Agilus Health v. Accor Lodging North America, 2010-0800 (La. 11/30/10), --- So.3d ----, the Louisiana Supreme Court held under the facts of that case that payment to a healthcare provider in an amount below the Louisiana Worker's Compensation Act's reimbursement schedule for medical services pursuant to a valid PPO contract does not violate state law.Judgments - In Interdiction of Jones, 10-66 (La.App. 5 Cir. 11/9/10), --- So.3d ----, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal held that a judgment ruling an individual in contempt, where the object of the proceedings before the court is to obtain a finding that someone is in contempt, is a final judgment subject to immediate appeal.Damages; Lost Chance of Survival - In Braud v. Woodland Village L.L.C., 2010-0137 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/8/10), --- So.3d ----, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal concluded that, in a medical malpractice case, a claim for lost chance of survival is a distinct, compensable injury and is distinguishable from a claim for loss of life in a wrongful death case.Therefore, under Braud, the plaintiff must prove that (1) the tort victim had a chance of survival at the time of the professional negligence, (2) that the tortfeasor's action or inaction deprived the victim of all or part of that chance, and (3) the value of the lost chance. The plaintiff need not prove that the patient would have survived but for the defendant's malpractice. Nevertheless, the plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she had a chance for survival, and that this chance was lost due to the defendant's negligence. Accordingly, the fact-finder must focus on the loss of chance of survival as a distinct compensable injury, and value the lost chance as a lump sum award
This is a true honor - a testament to the fact that Mr. Stauss is ranked by his peers at the highest level of professional excellence in terms of both ethical standards and legal ability.