Lexplug logoLexplug

Covert v. Liggett Group, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Louisiana
1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15493, 750 F.Supp. 1303, 1990 WL 177607 (1990)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Under Louisiana law, a personal injury claim is a 'strictly personal' right that cannot be assigned or donated to another party, and any such attempt is null and void. However, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a), if a suit is improperly filed in good faith by the assignee, the court may permit the substitution of the original claimant as the real party in interest, and the substitution will relate back to the date of the original filing.


Facts:

  • Jane H. Covert smoked cigarettes for nearly forty years.
  • In March of 1986, Covert was diagnosed with lung cancer.
  • Believing she had a cause of action against tobacco manufacturers but not wishing to be a party to a lawsuit, Covert executed a document donating her potential personal injury claim to her three children and a non-profit organization, Stop Teenage Addiction to Tobacco (STAT).
  • This donation was made before any lawsuit was filed.
  • Subsequently, the donees (her children and STAT) filed a lawsuit against several tobacco companies to recover damages for the injuries Covert sustained.
  • While the lawsuit and related motions were pending, Jane H. Covert died.

Procedural Posture:

  • The donees of Jane H. Covert's claim sued Liggett Group, Inc., and other tobacco companies in federal district court.
  • Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiffs lacked standing because the donation of the personal injury claim was legally void.
  • Plaintiffs responded by filing a motion for leave to amend their complaint to substitute the original claimant, Jane H. Covert, as the sole plaintiff.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does Louisiana law permit the assignment or donation of a personal injury claim, and if not, does Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a) allow for the substitution of the original claimant as the real party in interest in a suit improperly filed by the assignee?


Opinions:

Majority - Polozola, District Judge

No, the assignment is not permitted, but Yes, substitution is allowed. Under Louisiana law, a right to recover for personal injuries is 'strictly personal' and cannot be assigned or donated, rendering Jane H. Covert's attempted donation to her children and STAT absolutely null and void. However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a) permits the substitution of the real party in interest, Jane H. Covert, because the original lawsuit was filed by the donees in good faith based on an understandable mistake regarding the assignability of the claim. The court's reasoning traces Louisiana's civil law heritage from Roman and Spanish law, which consistently held personal injury rights to be strictly personal and non-transferable. While modern statutes, like La. Civ. Code art. 2315.1, made a survivor's right heritable after a victim's death, the legislature never altered the strictly personal nature of the victim's own right during their lifetime. The court specifically noted that the legislature's explicit declaration that property damage rights are heritable implies by omission that personal injury rights are not. Despite the donation being void, FRCP 17(a) is designed to 'prevent forfeiture when... an understandable mistake has been made.' Since there was no evidence of bad faith, substitution is warranted and relates back to the original filing date, preventing the claim from being dismissed.



Analysis:

This decision reinforces the traditional civil law doctrine that personal injury claims are 'strictly personal' and thus non-assignable, preventing the commodification or trafficking of personal injury litigation in Louisiana. The court distinguishes between the victim's original right (which is non-transferable) and a survivor's action (which is heritable), clarifying a complex area of Louisiana tort law. Simultaneously, the ruling demonstrates the equitable power of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, particularly Rule 17(a), to salvage a valid claim from a procedural defect like naming the wrong plaintiff, provided the error was made in good faith. This prioritizes resolution on the merits over procedural technicalities.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Covert v. Liggett Group, Inc. (1990) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Covert v. Liggett Group, Inc.