226 So. 3d 557
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- On Sept. 10, 2013, Lionel Lewis, driving a tractor-trailer for Reinhart Transportation, was stopped at a red light in Lafayette Parish and was struck from behind by a garbage truck driven by Dustin Mason, an employee of BFI Waste Services, LLC.
- Lewis sued Mason, BFI, and their insurer Old Republic in August 2014, and moved for summary judgment on liability and insurance coverage in February 2017.
- Lewis filed his summary judgment motion and supporting affidavit timely; he also attached the police accident report (which was later struck by the trial court).
- Respondents filed an opposition to the liability motion ten days before the hearing (i.e., untimely under La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(B)(2)); Lewis moved to strike the late opposition.
- The trial court granted summary judgment on insurance coverage, stated it did not consider Respondents’ late filings, but nevertheless denied summary judgment on liability; Lewis sought supervisory relief.
- The appellate court found Respondents’ opposition untimely, held the trial court lacked discretion to accept it over Lewis’s objection, applied the presumption of fault for a rear-end collision, and reversed and rendered judgment holding Respondents 100% at fault.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of opposition under La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(B)(2) | Lewis argued respondents filed their opposition untimely and he objected, so the trial court should not consider it | Respondents argued the trial court had discretion to accept a late opposition | Held: Article 966(B) permits extension only if court and all parties agree; with Lewis’s objection the court had no discretion and could not accept the late filing |
| Burden to invoke presumption of negligence for rear-end collision | Lewis’s affidavit established he was stopped at a red light and was struck from behind, invoking the presumption of fault against the striking motorist | Respondents failed (due to untimeliness) to present contrary facts to rebut the presumption | Held: Facts asserted by Lewis invoked the rear-end presumption; respondents produced no timely evidence to rebut; summary judgment for Lewis on liability appropriate |
| Trial court’s denial of liability summary judgment despite excluding late opposition | Lewis argued the court excluded late submissions but still denied liability SJ, which was inconsistent | Respondents relied on late materials to contest liability | Held: Because the court excluded the untimely opposition, there were no opposing facts; denial of summary judgment on liability was erroneous; appellate court reversed and rendered |
Key Cases Cited
- Schroeder v. Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ., 591 So.2d 342 (La. 1991) (standard of review and summary judgment burdens)
- Hardy v. Bowie, 744 So.2d 606 (La. 1999) (mover’s burden when not bearing trial burden explained)
- Leblanc v. Bouzon, 159 So.3d 1144 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2015) (presumption of fault in rear-end collisions)
- Berard v. Home State County Mut. Ins. Co., 89 So.3d 470 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2012) (appeals court review of summary judgments)