Broussard, David & Moroux, Author at Louisiana Lawyer Blog

Louisiana DOT to install more cable barriers on I-10

February 2, 2012 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

State transportation officials began the next phase of its 22 ½ mile project to a build cable barrier along I-10’s median between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. Studies suggest that cable barriers are an effective means of preventing deadly crossover crashes.

Crossover accidents can occur when a driver loses control of his vehicle, and the vehicle crosses over the median into oncoming traffic. Common causes of these accidents include speeding, distracted driving, drunk driving, unexpected changes in road conditions, or hydroplaning. All too often, in a crossover accident, an innocent driver’s vehicle is struck by an unexpected oncoming vehicle, resulting in serious injury or even death.

In the past, crossover crashes have been a major cause of highway fatalities in Louisiana. However, these cable barriers appear to be a step in the right direction for protecting Louisiana drivers. State troopers reported an almost immediate reduction in crossover accidents since the installation of the first installment of the cable barrier along I-10. According to state officials, the existing cable barrier on I-10 already reduced crossover accidents by 100 percent.

Derailed Train Causes Injuries

January 26, 2012 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

An Amtrak Train carrying over 70 passengers derailed in Michigan this week after colliding with a large truck that was stuck on its tracks. The accident sent 10 people to the hospital. This accident follows a string of recent Amtrak crashes over the past year, including two Louisiana Amtrak accidents that occurred in less than 24 hours last April.

In 2011 alone, there were over 10,000 train accidents in the United States. Many of these accidents occur at railroad crossings. Railroad crossings can be extremely dangerous junctures and often present challenging legal questions. As a common carrier, train operators are required by law to exercise a greater duty of care when operating the train. Nevertheless, it is often difficult to pinpoint the negligent actor in a railroad crossing accident.

Italian Cruise Tragedy

January 16, 2012 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

Authorities continue to search for the cause of the tragic Italian cruise ship accident that injured and killed several passengers. The Italian liner suspiciously ran aground and rolled on its side last month. In a public statement, Costa Cruises, the ship’s owner, alleged that captain error caused the fatal disaster.

Although cruise ship accidents are uncommon, cruise ships pose hidden dangers. All too often, an error on the part of the ship’s captain or crew can lead to harmful consequences. Cruise ships typically transport large groups of people in a confined space, increasing the possibility for serious injury. For this reason, cruise ship companies have a duty to adequately screen and train all employees, especially ship captains. A liner’s captain and crew are also under a duty to safely navigate, operate and maintain the ship while at sea. If these employees fail to maintain reasonably safe conditions on the ship, in certain circumstances the company may be held legally responsible for a passenger’s injury.

More Drilling May Equal More Injuries

January 9, 2012 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

Almost two years after the anniversary of the BP Oil Spill, reports indicate that deep gulf drilling in the Gulf of Mexico is flourishing once again, with oil companies drilling deeper than ever before. Oil companies believe that deep fields in the Gulf of Mexico may contain enough oil to meet the United States’ energy needs for almost two years.

Although deep gulf drilling poses economic benefits, widespread deep gulf drilling also raises concerns about offshore worker safety. As seen in the aftermath of the BP Oil Spill, deep gulf drilling poses even greater safety risks for offshore workers and the environment. Oil companies already have a legal responsibility to maintain safe working conditions for their workers. However, the deeper the drilling, the greater the need for oil companies to maintain adequate safety equipment and procedures.

In the event of an offshore accident, the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) protects certain maritime workers who sustain injuries on the job. The statute is a workers’ compensation scheme that provides financial assistance to an injured offshore worker for his wages, reasonable medical expenses and vocational rehabilitation. The statute also protects injured workers from unjust termination or retaliation.

Deadly New Orleans 40-vehicle pileup could implicate municipality liability

January 2, 2012 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

An investigation following the 40-vehicle pileup in New Orleans East this month revealed that the city’s street lights on the interstate near the scene of the accident were not functioning properly, according to a New Orleans city spokesperson. The pileup killed two people and injured over 50. Investigators believe that low visibility due to fog, poor lighting and possible smoke from a marsh fire caused the pileup.

This tragic accident demonstrates the role that a city’s negligence can play in causing a motor vehicle accident. A person injured in a motor vehicle accident may sue a municipality under limited circumstances when the city’s negligence caused the accident. In determining whether a city may be held liable for an accident in comparative fault regimes like Louisiana, the city’s negligence need not be the sole cause of the accident but must in some way be linked to the cause of the accident. Generally, cities can be held legally responsible for a motor vehicle accident if there is inadequate lighting, poor road conditions, improper signs or malfunctioning street signals.

Lafayette Housing Authority Suit

December 12, 2011 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

This month a former worker sued the Lafayette Housing Authority for back wages, claiming that she was wrongfully terminated in violation of her employment contract. This lawsuit marks the fourth lawsuit against the organization by former contract workers. As of now, two lawsuits have been settled for a total of $40,000.

In Louisiana, most employees are at-will employees. This designation means that an employer can terminate an employee for any lawful reason, with or without cause. Nevertheless, an action for wrongful termination arises if an employer fires an employee in violation of a protected legal right.

An employee’s legal rights may arise by contract or by operation of law. For example, if an employee has a contract with an employer, termination in violation of the contract could violate the employee’s contractual legal rights and give rise to a wrongful termination claim. As another illustration, if an employer fires an employee on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin, an employer may be in violation of federal and state employment discrimination statutes.

Consumer Discrimination Settlement Announced

December 5, 2011 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

This week Bank of America agreed to pay $335 million to people across the United States to settle claims of consumer discrimination. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Illinois Attorney General sued Bank of America, alleging that the bank’s recently acquired Countrywide Financial Unit offered mortgages to black consumers on less favorable terms than white consumers. According to the DOJ, this settlement is the largest ever settlement in a residential-fair-lending lawsuit.

In the lawsuit, the DOJ alleged that it found a pattern or practice of discrimination against black consumers, where over 200,000 black consumers were offered higher mortgages rates than their white counterparts. The DOJ also found evidence of sub-prime predatory lending in over 10,000 cases. The bank claims that this lending occurred prior to the bank’s involvement with the Financial Unit.

Winning the Case within the Case

November 28, 2011 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

The Louisiana Supreme Court recently ruled that a plaintiff bringing a legal malpractice suit does not need to first appeal his original case prior to filing a legal malpractice suit against his attorney. The Court also stated that expert testimony is not always required to prove a legal malpractice claim in the state. The Court’s holding simplifies the process of bringing a legal malpractice claim and eases a plaintiff’s burden in proving the claim.

In MB Industries, LLC v. CNA Insurance Company, the plaintiff sued its attorney after its attorney handed over their documents without first copying them during document production. These actions caused an adverse outcome in the plaintiff’s case. The Court found that a reasonable jury would find this situation to be negligence under any standard of care, and for this reason, the case required no expert testimony to prove the claim. However, the Court ultimately decided that the plaintiff failed to meet its burden of proof in the case.

Legal malpractice occurs when an attorney handles a lawsuit with negligence. The legal profession imposes various ethical and professional duties on lawyers. To prove attorney negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the attorney’s conduct fell below a reasonable standard of care expected from lawyers and that this breach of care caused the plaintiff to lose his case and suffer financial harm.

To prove legal malpractice cases, Louisiana courts utilize a “case within a case” approach, which can make legal malpractice claims notoriously difficult to prove. To prove causation, the plaintiff needs to prove that his underlying case would have been successful, but for his attorney’s negligence. In other words, a Court must determine that the plaintiff would have clearly won his underlying case to proceed with his legal malpractice lawsuit.

November: A Deadly Month for Private Planes

November 21, 2011 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

November has been a tragic month for air travel. Three separate private planes have already been in the headlines this month. The first plane crash, killed two Oklahoma State University coaches and all passengers on board. The second plane crashed in Arizona, tragically killing an entire family. The third plane crashed in Georgia, killing a married couple and their 24-year-old son. Federal investigators continue to search for the cause of these devastating crashes.

Private air planes pose unique aviation safety concerns. Compared to commercial pilots, private pilots often undergo less training. With less training, these pilots may lack the experience needed to adequately react to emergency situations in transit, such as unexpected extreme weather, wind gusts or a mechanical malfunction.

Another common problem that arises with private planes is mechanical failure or negligent plane maintenance. At times, mechanics and private plane manufacturers cut corners when it comes to ensuring that private planes are suitable for flight because these planes are not common carriers and typically carry less people than commercial airlines.

$365 Million Recovered for Victims

November 14, 2011 | by Broussard, David & Moroux

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently reported its annual winnings for victims of workplace discrimination for the 2011 Fiscal Year. This year, the EEOC recovered a record $365 million for victims of workplace bias through administrative enforcement. The EEOC also recovered an additional $91 million dollars for victims of workplace discrimination this year through merit-based lawsuits.

The EEOC is a federal agency that investigates charges of workplace discrimination and assists victims in bringing lawsuits against employers under certain factual circumstances. The EEOC enforces federal anti-discrimination laws and plays a critical role in the success of an employment discrimination lawsuit.

After someone believes he or she has been discriminated against by an employer on the basis of sex, race, religion, age, national origin, or disability, the next step in brining a lawsuit against an employer is to file a charge with the EEOC. The EEOC will then investigate the claims and determine whether the alleged discrimination is in violation of federal law.