Third Circuit Upholds Piercing of Corporate Veil for Liability

May 13, 2014 admin Business Litigation, Insurance Defense, Workers' Compensation Allen Parish, Beauregard Parish, Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, insurance defense, insurance defense litigation, Jefferson Davis Parish, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, Plauché, Smith & Nieset

The Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal recently upheld piercing of the corporate veil to hold individual members of a corporation liable for a judgment in favor of a workers compensation claimant where there were multiple entities with the same owner(s), there was extensive co-mingling of funds between the entities and one member completely funded all of the operations. The Court noted it appears that those companies were set up to avoid liability, but no efforts were made to treat these companies as separate entities. Hector v. Mo-Dad Environmental Services LLC, et al, 134 So.3d 133 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2014)

Plauché, Smith & Nieset is engaged in the insurance defense practice, concentrating on insurance defense litigation and business litigation in Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, Jefferson Davis Parish, Allen Parish, and Beauregard Parish. Plauché, Smith & Nieset also engages in the insurance defense practice throughout the state of Louisiana.

Court of Appeal Holds Sheriff Office Owed No Legal Duty to Suicide Victim

March 31, 2014 admin Insurance Defense Allen Parish, Beauregard Parish, business litigation, Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, Court of Appeal, insurance defense, insurance defense litigation, insurance defense practice, Jefferson Davis Parish, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, Nieset, Petition for Damages, Plauché, Smith, Third Circuit

In Simon v. Theriot, 127 So.3d. 1057, the Third Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s ruling granting an Exception of No Cause of Action dismissing the claims asserted by the survivors of a suicide victim. A lawsuit for wrongful death was asserted by the survivors of decedent. On October 8, 2010, the decedent dropped off his girlfriend at her home, and shortly thereafter a phone call was placed to 9-1-1 Emergency to file a complaint against him. St. Martin City Police and St. Martin Sheriff units were dispatched to the scene and found decedent occupying the vehicle, barricaded inside with a weapon. Decedent had placed phone calls to family members indicating his intent to kill himself. Over the next several hours, he was counseled by family members by cell phone to not shoot himself and to await the arrival of his father at the crisis scene. A crisis negotiator with the St. Martin Parish Sheriff’s Office was in control of negotiations with decedent at the scene. The crisis negotiator prohibited the family members from having any additional communications with him so as not to interfere with his handling of the negotiations. Decedent continued to call family members, and the phone calls went unanswered. Decedent subsequently shot and killed himself while in his own vehicle. Suit was filed by the surviving family members alleging negligence against law enforcement in the manner in which the crisis negotiations were conducted. The law enforcement defendants filed an Exception of No Cause of Action claiming that the survivors failed to state a legal cause of action against them. The trial court granted the Exception of No Cause of Action in favor of the defendant law enforcement agency, and an appeal was taken to the Third Circuit.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the trial court finding that the facts alleged in the Petition for Damages did not impose a duty upon the sheriff’s deputies. The Court of Appeal noted the deputies were alleged to have been confronted with an armed, barricaded, and suicidal individual who was never in custody during the encounter. Under these circumstances, no duty arose on the part of the sheriff or his deputies to protect this individual. Further, the Court of Appeal found that Louisiana law does not impose a duty on a sheriff to allow family members to participate in crisis negotiations to assure the survival of a suicidal man. Specifically, the Court of Appeal noted that the suicide victim was not in police custody at the time of incident, distinguishing the factual scenario from other Louisiana jurisprudence, and found that no duty existed.

Louisiana Third Circuit Opinion Regarding a Lawyers Judgment with Respect to Delegation of Duties

November 12, 2012 admin Workers' Compensation insurance defense, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, workers' compensation

In the recent worker’s compensation case of Bihm v. Unit Drilling, the Louisiana Third Circuit noted “we find no authority to suggest that a competent attorney should delegate his or her representation responsibilities to a paralegal or office worker.”

Insurance Defense Conference Presentation

May 3, 2012 admin Insurance Defense insurance defense, insurance defense litigation, insurance defense matters, insurance defense practice, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal

On April 20, 2012 Plauché, Smith and Nieset Partner, Chris Ieyoub, was a guest presenter at the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal Annual Conference held at the Eola Guest House in Natchez, MS. Ieyoub, whose practice is focused primarily on insurance defense matters in Southwest Louisiana, presented a one hour Continuing Legal Education lecture on the topic of professionalism. The presentation entitled: From the Other Side of the Bench: The modern practice, professionalism and protocol from a practitioner’s perspective, was very well received by the Louisiana judges in attendance.

Third Circuit Court of Appeal Rules in Workers’ Compensation Case

March 24, 2012 admin Insurance Defense, Workers' Compensation Allen Parish, Beauregard Parish, Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, insurance defense, insurance defense litigation, insurance defense practice, Jefferson Davis Parish, Lake Charles, Lake Charles insurance defense, Louisiana, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, marijuana, Marinol, Nieset, Plauché, Smith, workers' compensation

On March 7, 2012 the Third Circuit Court of Appeal rendered a decision in a case in which the trial court refused to award penalties and attorney’s fees, or otherwise find that a workers’ compensation insurer was in bad faith. The workers’ compensation insurer questioned a physician’s prescription of Marinol, which he prescribed for the stated purpose of providing some relief of pain and improving capacity for sleep. The court stated, “The FDA does not even recommend Marinol for treatment of pain conditions related to bodily injuries. Obviously, this drug is used in very limited circumstances.” The claims representative requested additional information from the treating physician, who failed or refused to provide it, and, the matter resulted in litigation. The Third Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court, finding that the judge did not commit manifest error in refusing to impose penalties or attorney’s fees upon the workers’ compensation insurance defendant.

Payment for Non FDA Approved Drugs in Workers’ Compensation

February 26, 2012 admin Insurance Defense, Workers' Compensation AIDS, business litigation, cancer, FDA, insurance company defendant, insurance defense, insurance defense litigation, insurance defense practice, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, marijuana, Marinol, MS, non-FDA approved use, workers' compensation

An insurance defense case was recently argued at the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal. The issue was whether Marinol, a synthetic form of marijuana, an FDA approved drug for cancer, AIDS and MS, when prescribed for a non-FDA approved use, must be approved by the employer in a workers’ compensation setting, or whether the insurance company defendant on behalf of the employer has a right to demand more justification from the doctor as to the basis upon which the doctor relies in prescribing the drug for a non- FDA approved use.

Plauché, Smith & Nieset is engaged in the insurance defense practice, concentrating on insurance defense litigation and business litigation in Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, Jefferson Davis Parish, Allen Parish, and Beauregard Parish. Plauche, Smith & Nieset also engages in the insurance defense practice throughout the state of Louisiana.

Burden of Proof for Compensable Workers Compensation Accident

February 8, 2012 admin Insurance Defense Allen Parish, Beauregard Parish, Broussard v. Stine Lumber Company, business litigation, Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, Christopher P. Ieyoub, insurance defense, insurance defense litigation, insurance defense practice, Jefferson Davis Parish, Lake Charles, Lake Charles insurance defense, Louisiana, Louisiana employers, Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act, Plauché, Smith & Nieset, Stine Lumber, work accident

In an important insurance defense decision for Louisiana employers, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal recently found that an employee who allegedly injured her neck, back and shoulders lifting 1 gallon cans of pain, failed to prove a work “accident” as defined by the Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Act. In Broussard v. Stine Lumber Company WCA 11-168 (attached), the court held that the claimant’s alleged accident was not unexpected or unforeseen and that there was no “event” that caused the claimant’s injuries. In reaching its decision, Court of Appeal, in Lake Charles, Louisiana, found that the WCJ was manifestly erroneous in determining that claimant met her burden of proving an accident by a preponderance of the evidence. The court reasoned that the claimant’s own inconsistent and unreliable testimony and the testimonies of physicians who were not privy to an accurate or complete medical history, failed to prove that her injuries were caused or exacerbated by the lifting of paint cans. The employer in this case, Stine Lumber, was represented by Christopher P. Ieyoub, Partner in the Lake Charles insurance defense firm of Plauché, Smith & Nieset, LLC.

Plauché, Smith & Nieset, LLC is engaged in the insurance defense practice, concentrating on insurance defense litigation and business litigation in Calcasieu Parish, Cameron Parish, Jefferson Davis Parish, Allen Parish, and Beauregard Parish. Plauché, Smith & Nieset also engages in the insurance defense practice throughout the state of Louisiana.