Charles Jones

The cases involved criminal appeals by defendants Snow and Larkin in Louisiana state court under docket numbers 2011-KA-0770 and 2011-KA-0771. The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal reviewed the matters and affirmed the lower court rulings. The decision was issued without a published opinion explaining the court's reasoning.

criminal law

This Louisiana criminal case, State v. Sparks-Sanders, came before the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit on appeal. The court issued a decision without a published opinion, affirming the lower court's ruling in part while vacating and remanding it in part. No further details on the underlying facts, issues, or reasoning are provided in the excerpted opinion.

criminal law

The case involved Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London appealing a lower court decision in a dispute with Zulu Social Aid & Pleasure Club. The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal issued a decision without a published opinion and affirmed the ruling below. No additional details on the underlying facts or legal issues were provided in the opinion.

business & regulatory

In State v. Hart, the defendant was charged with and convicted by jury of home invasion after evidence showed he entered an inhabited dwelling without permission and assaulted a person inside. The district court sentenced him as a fourth-felony offender to life imprisonment, but the appellate court affirmed the conviction while vacating the multiple-offender adjudication and sentence. The court remanded for resentencing as a first offender and for imposition of the mandatory fine required by La. R.S. 14:62.8, finding patent sentencing errors and that the 911 call evidence did not violate confrontation rights under the circumstances presented.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Marino, the defendant was convicted of heroin possession after police stopped him based on an untested confidential informant's tip that he was selling drugs, observed his movements during surveillance, and obtained consent to search his motorcycle saddlebag where heroin was found. The district court denied his motion to suppress the evidence and found probable cause, leading to a guilty plea under State v. Crosby and a seven-year sentence. On appeal, the court reversed the conviction and sentence, holding that the stop violated the defendant's rights because the tip lacked corroboration of criminal activity and the observed conduct did not provide reasonable suspicion for an investigatory detention. The court reasoned that without sufficient justification for the stop, the subsequent search and seizure were unlawful, requiring suppression of the evidence as fruit of the violation.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Ricky Ray's conviction for manslaughter and obstruction of justice stemming from the stabbing death of Benjamin Munn in New Orleans. Ray was initially found incompetent but later deemed competent to stand trial; after a jury convicted him of manslaughter and he entered a nolo contendere plea to obstruction, the district court imposed concurrent sentences of 30 years for manslaughter and 20 years for obstruction. On appeal, Ray challenged the conviction, the excessiveness of the manslaughter sentence, and an illegal restriction on parole, probation, or suspension in the manslaughter sentence. The court affirmed the convictions, finding no error in the trial proceedings or sentencing based on the evidence of Ray's statements, the autopsy details, and witness testimony, but amended the manslaughter sentence to remove the improper restriction because Louisiana law does not authorize such a prohibition for that offense.

criminal law

This case involves a workers' compensation claim by Ms. Merrill, a Greyhound bus driver, who fell down stairs while working in December 2006 and injured her back. She sought continued disability benefits and coverage for surgery, contending that the accident aggravated a pre-existing degenerative spinal condition, while Greyhound argued her symptoms and need for surgery were unrelated to the work incident. The Office of Workers' Compensation dismissed her claim, concluding that her need for surgery resulted solely from degenerative changes. On appeal after remand, the court reversed the OWC judgment and remanded the case, reasoning that medical records showed Ms. Merrill was asymptomatic before the accident, her consistent post-accident symptoms and objective findings of herniations supported aggravation of the pre-existing condition, and Greyhound presented no evidence to rebut the presumption of causation.

labor & employment

This case involved a dispute over workers' compensation insurance coverage and defense obligations between Louisiana Construction & Industry Self Insurance Fund (LCI) and its insured Nunez Construction, following an alleged workplace injury to Gary Partello. The Office of Workers' Compensation (OWC) had issued a declaratory judgment requiring LCI to defend and provide coverage to Nunez, despite denying LCI's request to expand the pleadings to address coverage issues. On appeal, the court reversed this ruling, finding that the OWC improperly went beyond the scope of the pleadings in granting declaratory relief, and remanded the matter for a decision on confirming LCI's default judgment against Nunez for indemnification due to Nunez's failure to report the claim timely and cooperate with the investigation.

labor & employmentprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case arose from an insurance dispute after Hurricane Katrina destroyed two commercial properties owned by J.R.A. Inc. in New Orleans, with the insurer Essex denying or limiting coverage under a policy that covered windstorm damage but excluded flood losses and imposed coinsurance requirements. The trial court awarded damages to J.R.A. for the covered losses, which Essex appealed, while J.R.A. cross-appealed the denial of statutory penalties for the insurer's handling of the claim. The Court of Appeal of Louisiana granted a motion to amend the judgment, modified the award, affirmed the judgment as amended, remanded the matter, and denied the cross-appeal on penalties, primarily because the evidence did not establish that Essex had acted arbitrarily or without probable cause in adjusting the claim.

propertybusiness & regulatory

In Howard v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp., a homeowner sued his insurer alleging fraud in a mediation settlement reached under Louisiana's post-Hurricane Katrina insurance mediation program, after the company had already paid part of the claim and then agreed to an additional amount in exchange for releasing the remaining coverage claims. The district court granted the insurer's motion to enforce the settlement agreement and dismissed the suit with prejudice. On appeal, the court affirmed, applying manifest error review to the trial court's factual finding that a valid contract existed. It held that the homeowner failed to present sufficient evidence of the elements of fraud, that he had the opportunity to rescind within three days but did not, and that he negotiated the settlement checks even after filing suit.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

The case State v. Nelson was a criminal matter heard by the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit. On April 27, 2011, the court issued a decision without a published opinion. It vacated the prior ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings, providing no additional details or reasoning in the excerpt.

criminal law

The case State v. Rollins was a criminal prosecution heard by the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit. Upon an application for rehearing, the court granted the request and affirmed the earlier ruling. The decision was issued without a published opinion, leaving the underlying facts, legal issues, and specific reasoning undisclosed in the record provided.

criminal law

The case involves a shareholder dispute in a family-owned corporation, Nerhus Properties, Inc., where plaintiff Adolph Suhren alleged that defendant directors, including relatives, breached fiduciary duties by diluting his shares, taking excessive compensation, and usurping corporate opportunities. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, ruling that the claims were perempted under Louisiana statute La. R.S. 12:1502. On appeal, the court reversed, holding that the claims were not perempted and remanding for determination of which claims, if any, were not prescribed, while allowing potential amendment of the petition.

business & regulatoryprocedure

In Merrill v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., a bus driver sued her employer for workers' compensation benefits after falling down stairs at a hotel in December 2006 and injuring her back, neck, and shoulders. Greyhound paid temporary benefits until March 2007 but then stopped, arguing the injury was a minor soft tissue issue that had resolved and that ongoing problems stemmed only from pre-existing degenerative spinal changes; the Office of Workers' Compensation agreed and dismissed the claim. On appeal, the court reversed, holding that the work accident aggravated the claimant's previously asymptomatic degenerative condition. The decision rested on the immediate onset of symptoms after the fall, consistent medical documentation of disc herniations over several years, the absence of any prior neck or back treatment, and the employer's failure to rebut the presumption that the workplace injury contributed to the disability and need for surgery.

labor & employment

The case involved the State of Louisiana appealing the district court's order quashing an indictment against Oscar J. Peters II for one count of possession of hydrocodone, a felony. Peters was arrested and bonded out in 2005, charged after Hurricane Katrina, failed to appear for arraignment despite notices sent to his bond address, had his bond forfeited, and did not reappear until 2010, at which point he filed a motion to quash arguing that the two-year prescription period under La.C.Cr.P. art. 578(A)(2) had expired. The district court granted the motion based on improper service and failure to arraign within legal timelines. The appellate court reversed, ruling that Peters' failure to update his address as required by La.C.Cr.P. art. 322 interrupted prescription under art. 579 because the state could not locate him due to that omission, and remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

The consolidated cases concerned the successions, or estate administration proceedings, of two deceased individuals named Liza and Stewart under Louisiana law. The Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit, was asked to review rulings from the trial court regarding these successions. The appellate court issued a decision without a published opinion in which it affirmed the lower court's determinations. This outcome reflects the court's agreement with the trial judge's handling of the estate matters without elaborating on specific legal issues or evidence.

family lawproperty

The case State v. Clark was an appeal heard by the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit, involving a criminal matter brought by the state against the defendant Clark. The court issued a decision without a published opinion in which it affirmed the ruling of the lower court. The court also granted a motion in conjunction with its affirmation. No specific facts or legal reasoning are detailed in the opinion excerpt.

criminal law

In Haley v. Leary, the plaintiff, who had lost a child custody proceeding, filed an Expedited Rule to Show Cause and Rule for Contempt against the trial judge, appellate judges, and Louisiana Supreme Court justices who ruled against him, alleging they had abandoned the child's best interests. The district court dismissed the filing for lack of jurisdiction, and the Court of Appeal affirmed. The appellate court held that the district court lacked authority to compel higher courts and that judicial immunity barred the claims because the judges' actions were core judicial functions performed within their jurisdiction. The court reviewed the record under a manifest error standard and found no error in applying immunity, while also remanding for a hearing on whether the plaintiff's filings were frivolous or contemptuous given his employment and pauper status.

family lawprocedure

In this maritime negligence case, Thomas Wynne sued William Trotter and Special T, L.L.C. after the M/V Special T lost power, restarted its engines near the docked M/V Tuner, and created a surge that caused Wynne to fall and fracture his heel while he was positioning fenders to protect the vessels. The trial court found the defendants fully at fault, awarding Wynne $185,000 for pain and suffering plus prejudgment interest and his wife $25,000 for loss of consortium. On appeal, the Louisiana Fourth Circuit reviewed the record under the manifest error standard and upheld the liability determination, the damage amounts, and the application of Louisiana interest rates, but amended the judgment to vacate prejudgment interest on future damages as contrary to federal maritime precedent and remanded for apportionment of past versus future losses.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved the Marchand family suing Continental Insurance Company, as successor to the liability insurer of dissolved employer Pendleton Shipyards, for damages from Dudley Marchand's asbestos exposure in the 1940s that caused his mesothelioma and death. The district court sustained Continental's peremptory exception of no right of action based on the corporation's 1951 dissolution. The appellate court granted the writ in part, holding that the pre-1989 Direct Action Statute allowed a direct right of action against the insurer for survival claims because dissolution did not extinguish the underlying cause of action and the plaintiffs qualified as third-party beneficiaries. It denied relief for the wrongful death claims, which accrued after the relevant peremptive period under corporate dissolution statutes.

proceduretorts & liability