Louisiana Injury Lawyers Blog

May 6, 2014

Facebook Users Employ Social Media Website to Avoid Sobriety Checkpoints

In this digital age, it seems that a social media site exists for nearly everything. This is even true with regard to law enforcement sobriety checkpoints. Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have pages notifying users of the location of police checkpoints. While New Orleans law enforcement has criticized the practice in the past, other police departments have taken a more favorable view, seeing the sites as helping to place an even brighter spotlight on law enforcement’s aggressive effort to detect and arrest impaired drivers.
When the State of Louisiana issued its Highway Safety Plan for Fiscal Year 2014, it made some strong conclusions regarding drinking and driving. “Driving after drinking is taken too lightly in Louisiana. A cultural shift toward understanding the realities and consequences of drinking and driving must take place.” The plan also called for numerous sobriety checkpoints around the state.

According to WGMB TV, however, savvy Facebook users are using the social media site as a tool for escaping these sobriety checkpoints. A Facebook page now exists entitled “Baton Rouge DWI Checkpoints.” Baton Rouge Police Lt. Cory Reech told WGMB that the checkpoint-related social media sites were highly successful. “The Facebook page or the Twitter or any kind of social media explodes within a few minutes of us setting up a checkpoint.”

April 26, 2014

Railroad Not Liable for Death of Deaf Woman Struck by Train, High Court Rules

by Cardone Law Firm

A fatal accident occuring along a train track in a New Orleans suburb resulted in a tragic death and, subsequently, a lawsuit that made it all the way to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Unfortunately for the family of the deaf woman killed in the accident, the high court concluded that the evidence in the case indicated that the accident was the result of the woman’s failure to look out for trains before entering the track, not improper warning signage at the intersection.

58-year-old Cynthia Tuckson was struck and killed as she walked along the railroad tracks at Taylor Street and Kenner Avenue in Kenner. The woman, who was deaf, could not hear the train coming and walked directly into its path. Witnesses at the scene told police that Tuckson did not see the train, according to nola.com. After the accident, Tuckson’s son sued the railroad, the conductor, the engineer and the city of Kenner for the wrongful death of his mother.

The son argued that the intersection where his mother died was inadequately signed, that the city and railroad had a duty to install active warning signals (such as caution lights or crossing arms,) but failed to do so and the failure to install this active warning system caused the woman’s death. An expert retained by the son contended that, due to the intersection’s limited sight lines and history of accidents, a warning system with lights and/or crossing arms was warranted. The trial court disagreed and granted a summary judgment motion that threw out the case, a ruling that the Louisiana Supreme Court concluded was proper.

April 13, 2014

Appeals Court Weighs the Permissibility of “Cost-of-Investigation” and “Cost-of-Prosecution” Fees in DWI/DUI Cases

by Cardone Law Firm

A case recently argued before a Louisiana appeals court could potentially have statewide effect depending on its fallout. In the case, a man convicted of DWI is challenging the costs assessed against him, which included not only court costs, but “cost-of-investigation” and “cost-of-prosecution” charges, as well, the News-Star reported.

Jesse M. Griffin II was arrested for a first DWI offense in 2012. In Sept. 2012, he pled guilty to a misdemeanor and received a $600 fine. In addition to his $600 fine and court costs, which were payable to the Union Parish Sheriff’s Office, Griffin was also hit with an additional $200 — $100 for the cost of investigation and another $100 for the cost of prosecution related to his case.

Read more about Louisiana’s DWI law.

Griffin objected to these extra charges, but the trial court ruled against. Griffin then took his case to the Court of Appeal, which heard arguments on the case earlier this month. According to Griffin’s attorney, the trial court includes in its orders tacked-on obligations of $300 each for cost of investigation and cost of prosecution (for a total of an extra $600) for every felony DWI case and $100 each (an extra $200 total) for the costs of investigation and prosecution of misdemeanor matters. The court order instructs offenders to pay their fines to the sheriff’s office and to make their cost-of-investigation and cost-of-prosecution payments payable to the “3rd JDDA Prosecution Fee”.

March 26, 2014

Appeals Court Upholds Judgment Against Pediatrician, But Tosses Case Against Hospital in Infant Malpractice Case

by Cardone Law Firm

A family who lost their infant child at only nine days of age received a partial legal victory recently in the Louisiana Court of Appeal pertaining to their medical malpractice case against a Slidell hospital and a pediatrician. The appeals court decided that a lower court judgment against the doctor could stand, but that the hospital was not liable in the child’s death because the family’s expert witness failed to testify regarding how the hospital staff’s missteps caused the child’s fatal injury.

The case regarded the treatment of Alex Ducre Jr. at Slidell Memorial Hospital. The child was born at the hospital roughly four weeks prematurely. Although the child initially appeared healthy, he began showing signs of mild jaundice around 36 hours after birth. The child’s pediatrician, Phyllis Waring, nevertheless discharged him the following morning. Three days later, the mother telephoned the hospital because the child showed worsening signs of jaundice. The nurse on the phone told the mother simply to bring the child to the hospital the next day for a regularly scheduled lactation appointment.

By the time the child arrived at the hospital, he was lethargic, and had poor muscle tone with yellow skin and yellowing in the whites of his eyes. The hospital admitted the baby to the pediatric intensive care unit. The child’s condition deteriorated and he died three days later.

March 13, 2014

Baton Rouge’s DWI Checkpoints Violated State Law, District Court Rules

by Cardone Law Firm

A state District Court judge recently agreed with a lower court in tossing evidence against an allegedly drunk driver arrested in Baton Rouge due to the improper conduct of a sobriety checkpoint, The Advocate reported. The court determined that the Baton Rouge Police Department violated guidelines established by the Louisiana Supreme Court for the proper implementation and conduct of checkpoints created to ensure compliance with the state and federal constitutions. The ruling carried wide implications as the procedural defect impacted not just one, but several drivers, arrested by the Baton Rouge police.

The ruling stems from a case involving Brian Parks, a driver whom Baton Rouge police arrested for DWI in Dec. 2010. Parks was driving through Baton Rouge when he encountered a sobriety checkpoint near the 100 block of Government Street. Parks’ attorney asserted that the way police carried out the sobriety checkpoint that ensnared the driver violated Louisiana law regarding the proper procedure for conducting DWI checkpoints.

Read more about Louisiana’s DWI law.

In 2000, the state Supreme Court ruled that DWI checkpoints do not necessarily violate the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, provided that law enforcement follow certain guidelines that the court laid out. These guidelines, among other things, require law enforcement to establish, in writing, several parameters regarding the checkpoint, including its location, time and duration. Supervisors or administrative personnel must carry out the task of establishing these parameters; it cannot be done by the officers in the field who directly conduct the checkpoint.

February 19, 2014

Dealing with DWI/DUI in Louisiana During Mardi Gras

by Cardone Law Firm

It is already that time of year again. Time for the purple, green and gold. Time for king cakes, krewes, beads and parades. Mardi Gras season brings great joy and revelry to the New Orleans area. However, your feelings of excitement and good cheer can turn sour if you find yourself facing a DWI charge. Should you find yourself in such a predicament, it is vitally important to know what to do in order to prevent a bad situation from becoming even worse, especially if you’re visiting from another state.

Learn more about Louisiana’s DWI law.

During Mardi Gras, the population of New Orleans roughly doubles. Both locals and visitors alike who choose to consume alcohol or other controlled substances as part of their Mardi Gras experience should be keenly aware that area law enforcement agencies ramp up to enforce a “crackdown” on drunk drivers during this time of year. Law enforcement officers have powerful tools at their disposal, too, including a $350,000 mobile unit that can perform DWI breath analyses in the field, the Times-Picayune reported.

This emphasis exists because Mardi Gras typically is the most dangerous time of year on area roads. According to the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission statistics from 2010, the period from Friday evening through midnight on Fat Tuesday saw 509 crashes involving injuries or fatalities. That number was higher than any other holiday during the year. Six people died in drunk driving-related accidents, tying Mardi Gras with Christmas for the most DWI-related fatalities.

February 5, 2014

Refusing an Officer’s Request to Submit to a DWI/DUI Test in Louisiana

by Cardone Law Firm

If you find yourself pulled over by a law enforcement officer who suspects you of driving drunk, you have many choices available to you and several decisions you must make. One of the first of these is to submit to, or refuse, a blood, breath or urine test. Refusing to undergo such a test can trigger a number of possible ramifications of which you should be aware.

The law in Louisiana contains a provision known as “implied consent.” Implied consent means that, if an officer makes a legal stop with probable cause to suspect that you were driving drunk, then you must consent to taking a test to determine your blood-alcohol content. The law requires the officer to read you an “Implied Consent Warning,” which states all the possible consequences to you if you refuse to submit to a test. If the officer fails to warn you about the ramifications of refusing, you may later be able to persuade a judge to throw out your refusal and decline to punish you for it.

Learn more about Louisiana’s DWI law.

If the officer gave you with a proper warning, and you still refused, then several things may happen. Refusal to submit triggers an automatic suspension of your driver’s license unless you petition the Office of Motor Vehicles for a hearing, and do so within 15 days of your arrest. Your automatic suspension will last 180 days if this is your first refusal, otherwise the suspension will run 545 days. If it is your first refusal, you may apply for a hardship license after three months. If it is not your first refusal, you are ineligible for a hardship license.

January 21, 2014

Ignition Interlock Devices and Louisiana DWI/DUI Law

by Cardone Law Firm

Some states require special aggravating circumstances or multiple convictions before they impose an ignition interlock device requirement. Louisiana is not one of them. Louisiana law regarding DWI/DUI contains many strict provisions in the state’s effort to curtail or stamp out drinking and driving. The state is one of only eight that requires even first-time offenders to attach an ignition interlock device to their vehicles. It is extremely important to understand what this process entails and what it means to your ability to continue driving if you’re convicted of drinking and driving. Sometimes, this provision can be waived and not imposed on a first-time offender.

Read more about Louisiana’s DWI law.

Ignition interlock devices, also known as IIDs or BAIIDs, are mechanisms that attach to vehicles’ dashboards and connect to the ignition system. The device requires the operator to blow a breath sample, which it then analyzes to determine the operator’s blood alcohol content. If the sample indicates that the driver is sober, the ignition system will work. If not, the vehicle will not start.

Be aware that ignition interlock devices are often quite expensive. The ignition interlock device on your car must come from a manufacturer approved by State Police Applied Technology. Currently, the state has seven approved vendors for ignition interlock devices. The driver must pay for the installation of the device and also pay a monthly lease fee. Given that installation may cost as much as $100 or more, along with a monthly fee of $50-100, the total cost of your ignition interlock device can set you back several hundred dollars, even for a duration as short as just six months.

January 7, 2014

Errantly Performed Biopsy Leads to Complications, Mastectomy, Cancer Patient Claims

by Cardone Law Firm

For many women, little is worse than receiving a diagnosis of breast cancer. For one Jefferson Parish woman, as reported by the Louisiana Record, her pain was allegedly worsened by an incorrectly performed biopsy. The woman claimed in a recent medical malpractice lawsuit that the error delayed her cancer diagnosis by several months, leading her to endure a series of invasive treatments and procedures that she claims she would not have needed if her medical care providers made the correct diagnosis after the initial biopsy.

Tamberly Gray’s health concerns emerged after her gynecologist discovered a lump in her right breast in 2008. The doctor referred the patient for a biopsy to discover if the mass was cancerous. The gynecologist, Dr. Penelope Treece, performed a vacuum-assisted biopsy of the patient’s right breast and told the patient she did not have cancer. Vacuum-assisted biopsies are minimally invasive procedures in which a probe is inserted into a small incision and, using ultrasound image guidance, extracts suspicious tissue for analysis.

The alleged failure in Gray’s case was not with the doctor’s failure to identify the tissue as cancerous; the tissue she removed was cancer-free. The problem was, according to the patient, the doctor inserted the probe in the wrong place and the tissue she removed was not from the mass.

December 20, 2013

What to Do If You’re Injured By a Drunk Driver

by Cardone Law Firm

The holidays are a wonderful time of year for gathering with family and friends. The holidays are also, regrettably, a time of increased incidences of people drinking and driving. If you or a loved one is injured by a drunk driver, it is important to understand what the law allows you to do, and what steps you should take.

Recent accidents in Calcasieu and Washington parishes highlight the risks, and potentially tragic consequences, of driving while intoxicated. When someone is injured in Louisiana as a result of another’s drunk driving, that person is entitled to recover for the damages caused by the drunk driver. Article 2315 of the Louisiana Civil Code generally provides a right to sue for damages, and Article 2315.4 specifically adds a right to seek exemplary damages in cases where the injured person proves that the driver acted with “wanton or reckless disregard for the rights and safety of others.”

You may be unfamiliar with the term “exemplary damages,” but may recognize them as “punitive” damages. Injured persons rarely recover exemplary damages in auto accident actions, except in cases involving drunk drivers. To succeed in receiving exemplary damages, you must show that the driver, in deciding to get behind the wheel in an impaired state, acted with conscious indifference to the consequences of his or her actions. This means that he or she knew or should have known that getting behind the wheel would likely lead to harm, but proceeded to drive anyway.