This case involved a juvenile, L.A., who was charged by delinquency petition with assault on a school teacher under La. R.S. 14:38.2 after an incident at Sci-Tech Academy where he allegedly pushed through staff and made threats toward a physical education teacher. The Orleans Parish Juvenile Court adjudicated L.A. delinquent, imposed a suspended six-month sentence, and placed him on one year of active probation. On appeal, L.A. argued that the petition failed to provide adequate notice of the specific conduct charged, violating due process, and that the evidence was insufficient. The Court of Appeal held that the petition's reference to the statute and description of an attempted battery or placing the victim in apprehension of a battery gave sufficient notice, and that the victim's testimony about threats, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, supported the adjudication under the Jackson standard. The court therefore affirmed the delinquency finding.
The case State v. Long was a criminal appeal before the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. The court reversed the defendant's conviction and sentence. The decision was issued without a published opinion, providing no further details on the underlying facts or legal analysis.
Willie Wilson filed a workers' compensation claim against Calamia Construction Company alleging he was injured on the job when a pipe struck him in the neck while working in a hole. The workers' compensation judge granted Calamia's motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims with prejudice. On appeal, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, reviewed the record and found no proof that Wilson received timely service of the summary judgment hearing date by certified mail, registered mail, or the sheriff as required by law. The court held that the lack of proper notice violated due process requirements under the Louisiana Constitution. It therefore vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.
In Reeves v. Grove, plaintiff Cynthia Reeves sued defendant George Grove after being attacked by his unrestrained dogs while walking her own dog in New Orleans, resulting in injuries to her shoulder, jaw, tooth, and psychological harm; the defendant stipulated to 100% liability, leaving only the amount of damages for trial. A jury awarded Reeves a total of $83,500, broken down into categories such as past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and disability, but nothing for loss of enjoyment of life. Reeves appealed, claiming the award was impermissibly low, that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of prior litigation proceeds and a surveillance video, and that it improperly denied her request to call a defense witness as an adverse witness during her case-in-chief. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings and that the jury's damage assessment had a reasonable basis in the evidence presented, including countervailing proof that justified the amount awarded.
The case involved Kerry Becnel, employed by Coastal Catering and assigned to work aboard vessels for Chet Morrison Contractors, who sued after allegedly falling from a barge and sustaining injuries due to missing safety features and inadequate lighting. The trial court granted partial summary judgment to CMC, ruling that Becnel qualified as a Jones Act seaman, that the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act did not apply, and that Coastal was obligated to defend and indemnify CMC while its insurer had improperly denied coverage. On appeal, the court reversed the judgment and remanded, finding that conflicting affidavits and witness testimony created genuine issues of material fact about whether Becnel spent a substantial portion of his employment time (around 30 percent) in service of vessels in navigation, which is required under the Chandris test to establish seaman status. This factual dispute prevented resolution of seaman status on summary judgment and also pretermitted review of the related indemnity, insurance, and penalty issues.
The case involved A.M.E. Disaster Recovery Services, Inc., which bid on a City of New Orleans nuisance abatement project and initially received notice of selection for two districts, but was later disqualified as a non-responsible bidder due to prior performance issues. A.M.E. sought injunctive relief and a writ of mandamus to compel the City to award and execute the contract under the Louisiana Public Bid Law, claiming it had submitted the lowest responsive bid. The trial court denied all relief, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that the Public Bid Law did not apply to the project, A.M.E. failed to attend the scheduled hearing on its bidder status, and mandamus was unavailable given the City's discretion in non-bid-law matters. The court found no abuse of discretion in the City's actions or the trial court's rulings.