 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Lucero v. Burney Gear Company6/21/2000
Judgment rendered June 21, 2000.
Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P.
In this case, the alleged tortfeasor/defendant challenges the continued application of the holding in Williams v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, 611 So.2d 1383 (La. 1993). The defendant filed an exception of prescription insisting that a prior suit against the plaintiff's employer for workers' compensation had not interrupted prescription. The trial court agreed and dismissed plaintiff's suit. Finding that the ruling in Williams governs this case, we reverse.
Facts
On July 23, 1996, plaintiff, Anthony Lucero, was injured when the bank of a drainage ditch collapsed causing the tractor he was driving to turn over and land on top of him. The accident occurred on property owned by defendant, Braswell Industries ("Braswell"). At the time of his accident, Anthony was cutting the grass on the Braswell property on behalf of T&M;Fence Company ("T&M;). T&M;contracted to clean up the Braswell property and employed Anthony to perform bush hogging work with his tractor.
Anthony filed with the Office of Workers' Compensation ("OWC") a workers' compensation claim against T&M;on July 22, 1997. On July 23, 1997, Anthony and his wife, Antoinette Lucero, filed this personal injury action in the district court. As originally alleged, the Luceros named Burney Gear Company and an unnamed party, labeled "ABC Company," as the owners of the property and claimed negligence on the part of the landowners for improperly maintaining the drainage ditch.
Following Anthony's death from causes unrelated to this accident, Antoinette amended the petition naming Braswell as the sole property owner on September 1, 1998. On November 16, 1998, the action before the OWC was settled and dismissed.
Braswell filed an exception of prescription which was granted by the trial court on August 31, 1999. The court specifically noted in the judgment the applicability of La. C.C. art. 2324 as amended in 1996. In bringing this appeal, Antoinette complains that the trial court erred by failing to follow the ruling in Williams, supra, and to recognize that the suit against T&M;for workers' compensation interrupted prescription in this case. Additionally both parties raise for our review the issue of whether the 1996 amendment to La. C.C. art. 2324, which ended the solidary relationship of co-tortfeasors, changed the law regarding interruption of prescription between an employer and third party tortfeasors.
Discussion
Louisiana Civil Code article 1794 provides that " n obligation is solidary for the obligors when each obligor is liable for the whole performance." "The interruption of prescription against one solidary obligor is effective against all solidary obligors." La. C.C. art. 1799.
Following significant rulings of the Louisiana Supreme Court, Foster v. Hampton, 381 So.2d 789 (La. 1980), Hoefly v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 418 So.2d 575 (La. 1982) and Narcise v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Co., 427 So.2d 1192 (La. 1983), new Article 1797 was added to the Civil Code in the revision of 1984 recognizing that the obligations of the obligors may arise from different sources yet solidarity of the obligation to the obligee nevertheless can exist. "It is the co-extensiveness of the obligations for the same debt, and not the source of liability, that determines the solidarity of the obligation." Narcise, supra at 1195.
In the case of Williams v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, supra, Article 1797 and the rationale of the above cases were applied in
Page 1 2 3 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|