89 So. 3d 372
La.2012Background
- Ambulance owned by Advanced EMS, disabled on the shoulder of Highway 23 in Plaquemines Parish after transmission problems.
- Plaintiff Jeryd Zito, driving south in a pickup, struck the ambulance’s left rear and side.
- District court awarded plaintiff $50,000, finding Advanced negligent for leaving the ambulance on the roadway without lights or signals.
- Court relied on Trooper Thompson’s testimony that the ambulance was near the travel lane and visible; plaintiff cited a careless-operation citation.
- Court of Appeal affirmed in part; Supreme Court granted certiorari to review manifest-error in the district court’s sole-fault finding.
- Supreme Court reversed and rendered, holding the district court’s factual findings were manifestly erroneous and the sole-cause was plaintiff’s inattentiveness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court’s finding that the ambulance was not completely out of the travel lane was manifestly erroneous | Zito argues the ambulance encroached on the lane and lacked proper warning. | Advanced argues the ambulance was off the travel lane and not blocking it. | Yes; finding was manifestly erroneous; ambulance did not block the travel lane. |
| Whether the record supports assigning sole fault to plaintiff for inattentiveness | Zito asserts plaintiff’s inattentiveness caused the collision. | Advanced contends ambulance negligence was the proximate cause. | Yes; the sole cause was plaintiff’s inattentiveness. |
| Whether RS 32:141 applies given the ambulance’s location on the shoulder | Zito treats violation as negligent parking under RS 32:141. | Advanced submits RS 32:141 is inapplicable because the ambulance wasn’t left in the traveled portion. | Inapplicable; evidence shows ambulance not left on traveled portion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 56 So.3d 215 (La. 2011) (standard for reviewing manifest error)
- Stobart v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 617 So.2d 880 (La.1993) (reasonable-person test for trial-court findings)
- Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La.1989) (credibility and internal consistency in witness testimony)
- Monceaux v. Jennings Rice Drier, Inc., 590 So.2d 672 (La.App.3 Cir.1991) (shared fault when hazards are present from both parties)
- Brown v. Beauregard Elec. Co-op., Inc., 647 So.2d 668 (La.App.3 Cir.1994) (comparative fault when multiple hazards exist)
- Clement v. Frey, 666 So.2d 607 (La.1996) (apportioning fault between negligent parties)
- Trahan v. State, Dept. of Transportation and Development, 536 So.2d 1269 (La.App.3 Cir.1988) (comparative fault considerations in traffic accidents)
- Graffagnino v. King, 436 So.2d 559 (La.1983) (trial-court credibility determinations are reviewed deferentially)