Under Louisiana law, uninsured/underinsured (“UM”) insurers are under strict requirements to issue “good faith” unconditional tenders of the undisputed portion of the plaintiff’s damages. These unconditional tenders are not contingent on the final disposition of the case, rather they must be paid up front and cannot be recovered in the event of a lower judgment
The Federal Arbitration Act: When jurisdiction arises solely from a federal question in the underlying dispute, can a federal district court confirm or vacate an arbitration award under the FAA? Stay tuned for an answer from SCOTUS!
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States heard argument in Badgerow v. Walters[1] as to an important jurisdictional question under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. 1, et seq. Specifically, the question presented to SCOTUS was whether federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under
The Fifth Crime: Ecocide
A panel of 12 lawyers from around the world recently proposed a legal definition for a new crime: ecocide. For years, the panel, along with various international groups, has sought to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to include ecocide as one of the crimes within the court’s jurisdiction.
Currently, the ICC
Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Adopted Children Have Right of Action for Death of Biological Family Members
The Supreme Court of Louisiana’s recent decision in Rismiller v. Gemini Ins. Co., 2020-0313 (La. 12/11/20), will impact all stages of civil litigation. In Rismiller, the Court held that, like biological and adopted children, children who have been given in adoption fall within the enumerated class of beneficiaries who may bring a wrongful
New Jersey Maintains “Unavailability” Exception to Allocation of General Liability Coverage in Asbestos Cases – Could Impact Coverage for Asbestos Claims in Louisiana
In asbestos-related injury claims, some states, including Louisiana, base an insurer’s liability for defense and indemnity on the amount of time an insurer is “on the risk.” For instance, if a claimant was exposed to asbestos for a ten year period and the insurer issued policies covering five of those ten years, the insurer is
Fifth Circuit Reaffirms Difficult Burden of Proving Contra Non Valentem
In Griffin v. Hess Corporation, 2017 WL 5125657 (5th Cir. Nov. 3, 2017) (unpublished) the U.S. 5th Circuit reaffirmed the difficult burden of proving that prescription should be excused under the Louisiana jurisprudential exception of contra non valentem non currit preaescriptio. Contra non valentem “means that prescription does not run against a person
Court Denies Temporary Restraining Order to Halt Construction of Bayou Bridge Pipeline
After contesting the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline, environmental advocacy groups have turned their attention to the proposed Bayou Bridge pipeline in South Louisiana. The Bayou Bridge pipeline is a 162-mile-long, 24-inch-wide proposed pipeline which will cross the Atchafalaya Basin to connect facilities in Lake Charles, Louisiana to crude oil refineries in St. James
5th Circuit Provides Bright-line Rule for 30-day Removal Clock After Receipt of Deposition Transcript
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals “adopt[ed] a bright-line rule [on January 11, 2018]: Section 1446(b)(3)’s removal clock begins ticking upon receipt of the deposition transcript” as opposed to running from the date of the deposition testimony. The decision in Morgan v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc., et al, No. 17-30523, __ F.3d __ (5th
Fifth Circuit Provides Guidance on Removability of Mass Actions under CAFA
On January 9, 2018, a split panel of the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an order from the district court, denying a motion to remand a matter removed under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”). The 2-1 decision In Warren Lester, et. al. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., et. al., No. 14-31383,
Injured Plaintiffs’ Recovery of Imaginary Medical Costs
In Louisiana, the collateral source rule mandates that a tort plaintiff be awarded the full value of his medical expenses against the tortfeasor, including any amounts written off by the provider, when that plaintiff paid some “consideration” (money) for the benefit of the written-off amount. In other words, even though a person may have health