IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IMPERIAL TRADING CO., INC., ET AL. TRAVELERS PROPERTY CAS. CO. OF AMERICA ORDER AND REASONS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No versus

NO CA-0034 ROYAL CLOUD NINE, L.L.C. COURT OF APPEAL VERSUS LAFAYETTE INSURANCE COMPANY FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2008 CA 1651 LINDA TORRES VERSUS PACKING COMPANY. Judgment Rendered

No. 51,331-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

Case 2:16-cv Document 20 Filed 02/23/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 150 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

DR. DAVID MILLAUD, ET AL. NO CA-1152 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM Appellants, v. Case No. 5D

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

CASE NO. 1D Peter D. Webster and Christine Davis Graves of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

APRIL 18, 2012 FRITZ SCHROTH AND NELLIE CLARK NO CA-1385 COURT OF APPEAL VERSUS

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

CHINITA WEBER, INDIVIDUALLY AND O/B/O HER DECEASED AUNT, MARY LONDON, AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED NO CA-0182 COURT OF APPEAL

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT ************

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 31, 2002

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE October 16, 2018 Session

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

Case 1:12-cv GAO Document 17 Filed 03/21/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

RICHARD STALDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF BLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS AND VENETIA MICHAEL WARDEN DAVID WADE CORRECTIONAL CENTER

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

NO CA-0250 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AND AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT VERSUS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

NO CA-0888 COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * * VERSUS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

In this case we must decide whether Kentucky law or Illinois law governs a lawsuit arising

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D. C. Docket No. 1:07-cv ODE. versus. No.

Accountability Report Card Summary 2018 Louisiana

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE July 26, 2001 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

OCT Judgment Rendered:

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA CASE SUMMARIES March 14, 2008

No. 49,278-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * MICHAEL DAVID COX Plaintiff-Appellee. Versus

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2010

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS. No Non-Argument Calendar. D. C. Docket No. 09-CV-3252-RLV. versus

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv DLG. versus

No. 52,555-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 1 July Appeal by plaintiff from order entered 5 September 2013 by

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D & 5D

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION. THOMAS C. and PAMELA McINTOSH

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Jean Coulter v. Butler County Children

Case 1:15-cv MSK Document 36 Filed 03/10/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. BUCK PORTER, Appellant V. A-1 PARTS, Appellee

MARC E. JOHNSON JUDGE

Recent Decisions COLLATERAL SOURCE RULE

NO CA-1024 BRENDA PITTS VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL LOUISIANA CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *

F I L E D September 9, 2011

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 2:15-cv RWS.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. FAIRNESS HEARING: RULE 23(e) FINDINGS

US Bank NA v. Maury Rosenberg

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

ROBERT A. CHAISSON JUDGE

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT combined with combined with **********

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE January 31, 2012 Session

No. 45,202-CA No. 45,203-CA No. 45,204-CA. (Consolidated cases) COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *

* * * * * * * (Court composed of Judge Dennis R. Bagneris, Sr., Judge Terri F. Love, Judge Edwin A. Lombard)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO KA-0415 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL RODERICK WEST FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Appealed from the Office of Workers Compensation Administration District 5 In and for the State of Louisiana Docket Number

No. 44,069-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA AND * * * * *

Mamdouh Hussein v. State of NJ

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Justice Court Precinct 8 Judge Tom Gillam III Justice of the Peace JUSTICE COURT PROCEDURES SMALL CLAIMS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

JERYD ZITO NO CA-0218 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL ADVANCED EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES, INC. AND EMPIRE INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY FOURTH CIRCUIT

* * * * * * * COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS, ELODIE GRANNIER ROME AND DONALD FRANCIS ROME

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 5, 2018 Session. CAPITAL PARTNERS NETWORK OT, INC. v. TNG CONTRACTORS, LLC, ET AL.

Case: , 03/23/2016, ID: , DktEntry: 55-1, Page 1 of 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Ronald Tomasko v. Ira H Weinstock PC

Transcription:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D August 11, 2009 No. 08-30795 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk MARKETFARE ANNUNCIATION, LLC; ROBERT RESOURCES, LLC, MARKETFARE N. BROAD, LLC; ROBERT RESOURCES, LLC,

MARKETFARE (ST. CLAUDE), LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee- Cross-Appellant, ROBERT RESOURCES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, ESTATE OF JOHN G. SCHWEGMANN, JR.; GUY G. SCHWEGMANN TRUST NO. 2, Intervenors-Appellees, JOHN FRANCIS SCHWEGMANN TRUST NO. 2; JOHN GUY SCHWEGMANN; LAURIE S. DAMARE; HEIDI SCHWEGMANN LEPOROWSKI, Intervenor Defendant-Appellant- Cross-Appellee. 2

MARKETFARE CANAL, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee- Cross-Appellant, ROBERT RESOURCES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, Defendant-Appellant- Cross-Appellee. M.L. ROBERT, II, LLC; ROBERT RESOURCES, LLC, Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana No. 2:06-CV-7232 3

No. 08-30795 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The plaintiff and intervenor (jointly referred to as Marketfare ) each own one or more grocery stores damaged by Hurricane Katrina. All the stores were insured by the same company ( United Fire ), by policies that covered damages from wind, and wind-driven rain, and looting but not from flooding. When disputes arose regarding coverage as to damages, Marketfare sued United Fire, utilizing diversity jurisdiction. The jury awarded extensive damages and penalties for bad faith. United Fire appeals the judgment, and Marketfare appeals the calculation of a penalty. We have reviewed the briefs and applicable law and pertinent parts of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. There is no reversible error on United Fire s direct appeal. The jury was properly charged, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings. The award of damages does not offend the policy s anticoncurrent causation clause. The recovery for business interruption is supported by sufficient evidence. The issue regarding the award of damages without invoking the coinsurance provision was waived. The district court properly gave damages for the property at West Esplanade for damaged equipment and property that was not replaced. There was ample evidence to support bad-faith penalties. The only reversible error regards Marketfare s cross-appeal. The district court correctly recognized that Marketfare cannot recover duplicate penalties under La. R.S. 22:1220(A) and 22:658. It can, however, recover once for the greater of the two penalty provisions, in addition to consequential damages. In * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 4

No. 08-30795 other words, although an insured cannot recover a penalty under both 1220 and 658, it is entitled to the greater penalty of the two in addition to consequential damages under 1220. It follows that the judgment must be modified so that the portion of the judgment that reads, Judgment in favor of plaintiff, Marketfare St. Claude L.L.C., and against defendant United Fire & Casualty Insurance Company for statutory damages and penalties pursuant to LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 22:1220 in the amount of $1,800,000, legal interest to run from date of judgment, is modified to read, Judgment in favor of plaintiff, Marketfare St. Claude L.L.C., and against defendant United Fire & Casualty Insurance Company for damages pursuant to LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 22:1220 in the amount of $900,000.00 plus a statutory penalty pursuant to LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 658 in the amount of $1,470,393.50, legal interest to run from date of judgment. In addition, the portion of the judgment that reads, Judgment in favor of plaintiff Marketfare Canal, L.L.C., and against defendant United Fire & Casualty Insurance Company for statutory damages and penalties pursuant to LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 22:1220 in the amount of $2,016,000.00, legal interest to run from date of judgment, is modified to read, Judgment in favor of plaintiff, Marketfare Canal, L.L.C., and against defendant United Fire & Casualty Insurance Company for damages pursuant to LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 22:1220 in the amount of $1,008,000.00 plus a statutory penalty pursuant to LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 658 in the amount of $1,575,684.50, legal interest to run from date of judgment. The judgment, as MODIFIED, is AFFIRMED. 5