Blackshear v. Allstate Ins. Co.
647 So. 2d 589, 94 La.App. 3 Cir. 765, 1994 La. App. LEXIS 3343 (1994)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Louisiana law, punitive damages may be awarded when a defendant's intoxication is a cause-in-fact of injuries and their conduct, such as operating a vehicle at high speed without lights at dusk, amounts to a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others. An appellate court will only alter a trial court's damage award if it finds a clear abuse of the trier of fact's vast discretion.
Facts:
- On May 21, 1989, William Daly, his nephew Brian Alan Blackshear, and two others went boating on the Calcasieu River in a boat supplied by Daly.
- During the day, the group consumed nearly two cases of beer.
- At approximately 7:00 p.m., in fading light, Daly operated the boat at forty to forty-five miles per hour without its running lights activated.
- All of Daly's passengers, including Blackshear, were asleep at the time.
- Daly lost control of the boat and crashed it into the riverbank, admitting he was following the shoreline too closely and his judgment was impaired by alcohol.
- Blackshear was on the side of the boat that sustained extensive damage, was rendered unconscious, and suffered multiple serious injuries, including lacerations, a broken rib, and a concussion.
- Approximately two hours after the accident, a blood test revealed Daly had a blood-alcohol concentration of .18.
- Years after the accident, doctors diagnosed Blackshear with compression fractures in his thoracic spine, which they linked to the force of the boat crash.
Procedural Posture:
- Brian Alan Blackshear filed suit against William Daly and Allstate Insurance Company in a Louisiana state trial court.
- The suit sought compensatory damages for personal injuries and punitive damages based on Daly's intoxication.
- Following a bench trial, the trial court found in favor of Blackshear and awarded a total judgment of $152,043.05, which included specific amounts for general damages, a back injury, medical expenses, and punitive damages.
- Blackshear, as plaintiff-appellant, appealed to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit, arguing that the awards for general damages and future medical expenses were inadequately low.
- Allstate Insurance Company, as defendant-appellee, answered the appeal, arguing the punitive damage award was excessive and that the trial court erred in awarding any damages for the back injury.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Did the trial court abuse its discretion in its award of general, special, and punitive damages for injuries sustained in a boating accident caused by an intoxicated operator?
Opinions:
Majority - Peters, J.
Partially. The appellate court held that the trial court abused its discretion by awarding insufficient general damages for non-back injuries and insufficient future medical expenses, but did not abuse its discretion in awarding damages for the back injury or in the amount of punitive damages. The court found the initial $30,000 general damages award for non-back injuries was an abuse of discretion given the severity of Blackshear's multiple lacerations, scarring, permanent loss of grip strength, and need for extensive future surgeries, raising it to $50,000. It also found the future medical expense award was based on a miscalculation of the surgeon's fees and hospital costs, increasing it from $23,800 to $35,200. However, the court affirmed the $25,000 punitive damages award, reasoning that Daly's conduct—operating a boat while intoxicated at high speed, at dusk, without lights, and with sleeping passengers—constituted a wanton and reckless disregard for safety under La. Civ. Code art. 2315.4. Finally, the court upheld the $60,000 award for the back injury, finding that the plaintiff was entitled to the presumption of causation because he was healthy before the accident and the medical evidence established a reasonable causal connection between the accident and the injury, despite the delayed diagnosis.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the standard for awarding punitive damages under Louisiana's intoxicated motorist statute, emphasizing that a combination of reckless actions beyond mere intoxication can satisfy the 'wanton and reckless disregard' requirement. The case also serves as a practical illustration of the 'abuse of discretion' standard for appellate review of damage awards, demonstrating that while appellate courts give great deference to trial courts, they will correct awards that are inadequately supported by the evidence, particularly when based on clear miscalculations. Furthermore, it reinforces the strength of the 'presumption of causation' for plaintiffs who were in good health prior to an accident, allowing them to connect injuries to an accident even with a significant delay in diagnosis.
Unlock the full brief for Blackshear v. Allstate Ins. Co.