Joseph Louis and Marie Louis v. Edgar Ramos, Green Line Freight Inc., American Millennium Ins. Company, Desiree Castello and Allstate Ins. Company

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST CIRCUIT

JOSEPH LOUIS AND MARIE LOUIS

VERSUS

EDGAR RAMOS, GREEN LINE FREIGHT INC.,
AMERICAN MILLENNIUM INSURANCE COMPANY,
DESIREE CASTELLO, AND ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY

Decision Rendered: FEB 2 4 2021

ON APPEAL FROM
THE 19th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LOUISIANA
DOCKET NUMBER 655, 656, SECTION 22

HONORABLE TIMOTHY E. KELLEY, JUDGE

Richard S. Thomas Attorney for Plaintiffs/ Appellants
Baton Rouge, Louisiana Joseph Louis and Marie Louis

Gregory Kent Moroux Jr. Attorneys for Defendants/ Appellees
Kolby P. Marchard Desiree Castello and Allstate
Baton Rouge, Louisiana Insurance Company

BEFORE: WDONALD, HOLDRIDGE, and PENZATO, 77.

0 Jy<
jof. j-.iAAGN2-S

McDONALD, J.

Joseph and Marie Louis, occupants of the lead vehicle rear ended in a three -

vehicle collision, filed a personal injury suit against Desiree Castello, the driver of the

middle vehicle; her insurer, Allstate Insurance Company ( Allstate); Edgar Ramos, the

driver of the last vehicle; his employer, Green Line Freight, Inc. ( GLFI); and its

insurer, American Millennium Insurance Company ( AMIC). Mr. Ramos, GLFI, and

AMIC stipulated to liability, and, after a settlement, the Louises dismissed their claims

against these three defendants. The district court thereafter granted summary

judgment to Ms. Castello and Allstate and dismissed them from the suit with

prejudice. The Louises appeal.

Appellate courts review the grant or denial of a summary judgment de novo

under the same criteria governing the district court's determination of whether

summary judgment is appropriate. Maggio v. Parker, 17- 1112 ( La. 6/ 27/ 18), 250

So. 3d 874, 878. After our review, and after considering the parties' appellate

arguments, we conclude the district court properly granted summary judgment to

Ms. Castello and Allstate. That is, these summary judgment movants introduced

evidence showing that Ms. Castello had her vehicle under control, she closely

observed the Louis vehicle in front of her, and that she was following at a safe
distance under the circumstances. See Lawrence v. McKenzie, 17- 1131 ( La. App. 1

Cir. 2/ 21/ 18), 2018 WL 990304, * 8. With this evidence, Ms. Castello and Allstate

rebutted the presumption that Ms. Castello, as a following motorist, was negligent.

See La. R. S. 32: 81A; Lawrence, 2018 WL 990304 at * 8. The burden then shifted to

the Louises to produce evidence sufficient to establish a disputed factual issue as to

Ms. Castello' s fault, and they failed to do so. Because they did not meet this

burden, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and summary judgment was

appropriate. La. C. C. P. arts. 966D( 1) and 967B. Compare Lege v. FAS Services,

Inc., 15- 1622 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 4/ 15/ 16), 2016 WL 1535068, * 5.

2

We affirm the August 3, 2020 summary judgment in favor of Desiree Castello

and Allstate Insurance Company, which dismisses them from the suit with prejudice.

We issue this memorandum opinion in compliance with the Uniform Rules — Courts of

Appeal, Rule 2- 16. 16. We assess costs of the appeal to Joseph and Marie Louis.

AFFIRMED.

C