• U.S. Fifth Circuit: Allen v. United States Postal Service, No. 22-30297 (5th Cir. 3/21/23). Ms. Anastasia Allen brought a claim for employment discrimination against the United States Postal Service, asserting that she had been terminated as retribution for bringing an age discrimination claim. Her claim was dismissed on summary judgment by District Judge Barry Ashe, who ruled that Ms. Allen’s termination was presumed to be in good faith since the terminating officer (Mr. Porche) was the same officer who hired Ms. Allen. Mr. Ryan was retained by Ms. Allen after the dismissal of her claim and he successfully handled her appeal before the U.S. Fifth Circuit. The Court ruled that “same actor” presumption did not apply to Mr. Porche, since he had only agreed to hire Ms. Allen in order to settle a prior EEO claim she had brought against the Post Office. The Court held: “On the contrary, animus in Allen’s termination is consistent with animus in what was, according to Allen, not an arms-length hire but instead a begrudging re-hire effectuated to settle a discrimination complaint.” The matter was remanded to the district court for trial on the merits.
• Louisiana Fourth Circuit: Washington v. Taylor, 334 So.3d 1060 (La.App. 4. Cir 2022). Brian Taylor’s pickup and 30 foot box trailer were making a left turn across Washington avenue, when Ms. Washington inexplicably pulled out in front of the turning truck and a minor fender-bender occurred. Although Louisiana law (and New Orleans ordinances) require motorists at stop signs to stay stopped until the intersection is clear of all traffic, Ms. Washington insisted the accident was Mr. Taylor’s fault. A one day judge trial before Judge Ad Hoc Ronald Johnson ended in a judgment in favor of Mr. Taylor, and the case was seemingly concluded. As Lee Corso says, “not so fast, my friend!!” Newly elected judge Nicole Sheppard initially denied Ms. Myles’ motion for new trial, but then inexplicably granted the motion, ordered a full retrial, and eventually found Mr. Taylor was 90% at fault. The district court awarded Ms. Myles $19,000 in damages. Mr. Ryan appealed the judgment to the Louisiana Fourth Circuit, which in a lengthy opinion noted numerous errors committed by the district court and reset the allocation to 100% to Ms. Washington.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Planchard v. New Hotel Monteleone, LLC ; 2021-CC-0347 (12/10/21) – Cindy Planchard allegedly slipped on a liquid in the marble lobby of the Hotel Monteleone and brought suit for injuries sustained in her fall. Video of the incident showed that in the minutes before the incident, hotel employee were actively dry mopping the area, and had placed four “wet floor” signs. In keeping with the upscale design of the hotel, the signs were brass and oak placards, displaying a pictogram of a person falling and the word “caution” in several languages. Hotel Monteleone moved the trial court for summary judgment, asserting that it had fulfilled its duty to act reasonably when it mopped up the spill and placed appropriate signs. Ms. Planchard countered that she “didn’t read” the signs, and that she did not recognize the signs as marking danger, since they were not made of yellow plastic. The trial court denied summary judgment, and the Fourth Circuit court of appeal denied writs (3-2). Ike Ryan and Tre Roux then prevailed in a writ application to the Louisiana Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case with full briefing and argument. After reviewing the record, including video of the incident, the S. Ct. held that Hotel Monteleone had fulfilled its duty by placing four (4) brass and oak “wet floor” placards. The trial court was reversed and summary judgment was granted in favor of Hotel Monteleone.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Jones v. Whips Elec. (La. 2021). Otis Jones claimed he was “electrocuted” when he touched an exposed wire in the crawlspace of the Brownes’ newly purchased house, which was undergoing renovation. The Brownes lived in Houston, Texas, and they showed that not only did they have zero knowledge of any exposed wires, no such hazards had been reported on the pre-purchase expert home inspection. The Brownes sought summary judgment in the trial court, which was denied. The Fourth Circuit also declined to grant the Brownes’ application for supervisory writ. Mr. Josh Keller asked Mr. Ryan to assist in drafting an application for writ of certiorari to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Working together, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Keller successfully petitioned the Supreme Court, who remanded the matter to the Fourth Circuit for full briefing and opinion. On remand, in a 2-2-1 split decision, the Fourth Circuit once again denied the Browne’s MSJ. Although, Mr. Ryan had since departed to form his own appellate practice, Mr. Keller kept up the fight, making yet another application for relief from the Louisiana Supreme Court. The Supreme Court once again granted certiorari, and issued a unanimous opinion entering summary judgment in favor of the Brownes.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Ellis v. Quiett, 2019-C-0065 (La.3/25/19) – Reuben Ellis was injured in an early morning shoot out in the parking lot of the Bella Noche Nightclub in Baton Rouge. Ellis brought suit against the nightclub, its promoter, and Progressive insured Plaza Holdings, LLC, the landlord of the shopping center where the Bella Noche was located. Plaintiff contended that the defendants failed to provide adequate security in the parking lot. Fortunately for Plaza Holdings, the nightclub’s lease unequivocally made the Bella Noche responsible for hiring its own licensed security, and stated that “notwithstanding anything to the contrary” Plaza Holdings did not assume any responsibility for security. Nineteenth JDC Judge Janice Clark granted Plaza Holdings Motion for Summary Judgment, dismissing the claims against the landlord. However, in a (3-2) opinion authored by Judge Vanessa Guidry-Whipple, the First Circuit reversed, finding that the “notwithstanding” clause created an ambiguity and that Plaza Holdings “may have” assumed “some duty” to provide security against the criminal acts of third persons. In a rare unanimous civil writ grant, the Louisiana Supreme Court reversed, holding that the “notwithstanding” clause superseded any other parts of the lease, and that “based on the clear and unambiguous language of the lease agreement, Plaza Holdings did not contractually assume a duty to provide security.”
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Pociask v. Moseley, 122 So.3d 533 (La. 2013) – In Pociask v. Mosely, Mr. Ryan enrolled as counsel and drafted an application for writ of certiorari to the Louisiana Supreme Court on behalf of Mr. Pociask which was granted. After briefing and argument, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the First Circuit Court of Appeal opinion and reinstated the district court’s judgment that Mr. Pociask’s action to disavow paternity was timely. Summary judgment for Mr. Pociask was reinstated, and Ms. Moseley’s claim that he was the father of “J.M.” were dismissed.
• Louisiana First Circuit: Broussard v. Gallo, 2012-CA-239 (La.App. 1 Cir. 11/2/2012) – Mr. Ryan enrolled as appellate counsel after the Cadillac Cafe was held liable for a bar fight in which one patron smashed a beer bottle on the face of another. The evidence showed that following a verbal altercation, Benjamin Meadors was approached and confronted by Paul Broussard in the parking lot of the Cadillac Cafe in Baton Rouge, LA. Meadors had exited the bar with a beer bottle, in violation of Baton Rouge’s “open container” ordinance, and he reacted to Broussard’s approach by striking him in the face with the beer bottle. Meadors fled the scene but was chased down and caught by the Cadillac Cafe’s bouncers. The case was tried to Judge Wilson Fields, who found Cadillac Cafe 60% at fault, Meadors 30% at fault, and Broussard 10% at fault. Mr. Ryan enrolled as appellate counsel and successfully argued that the Cadillac Cafe had not breached any legal duty to Broussard. Broussard’s claims against Cadillac Cafe were dismissed.
• Louisiana Fourth Circuit: Gaunt v. Progressive Sec. Ins. Co., 2011-CA-1094 (La.App. 4 Cir. 6/8/2012); 93 So.2d 1250 – Mr. Ryan enrolled as appellate counsel after a district judge found U-Haul to be 90% at fault for an accident and entered judgment against U-Haul for $1,795,100. The case involved Mr. Omar Erazo’s F-150 pickup truck, which detached from a U-Haul auto transport and rolled free on Interstate 10 before it was struck by James Gaunt’s Dodge Ram pickup. Mr. Gaunt was an “eggshell skull” plaintiff, and he alleged shoulder, knee, and spine surgeries as a result of the accident. The evidence showed that Mr. Erazo had noticed the wheel straps coming loose from the F-150 during his trip, but that he “just blew off” U-Haul’s request to bring the vehicle to the nearest U-Haul for inspection and assistance. Despite the challenges presented by Louisiana’s “manifest error” standard for review of fact, Mr. Ryan successfully argued that the district court’s allocation of only 10% fault to Erazo was clearly wrong. The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court, raised the fault of Erazo to 50%, and reduced the judgment against U-Haul to $897,550.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Prudencio Vera v. The Grand, LTD, 2011-2413 (La.1/13/12); 77 So.2d 967 – Plaintff, Prudencio Vera, was a Mexican national who was injured in an offshore accident. Through discovery of his employment file, it became clear that he had obtained employment by providing identification to his employer that was not genuine. When defense counsel attempted ask deposition questions about Mr. Vera’s identity documents, social security number, and citizenship status, plaintiff’s counsel instructed Mr. Vera not to respond. The district court overruled defendants’ attempts to compel responses, and defendants sought supervisory relief. Mr. Ryan drafted a successful writ application to the Louisiana Supreme Court, which ordered that Vera provide full responses regarding his documents and citizenship status.
• U.S. Fifth Circuit: Jackson v. Tanfoglio Giuseppe, SRL, 615 F.3d 579 (5th Cir. 2010) – Mr. Ryan represented Fratelli Tanfoglio, S.n.c. to win an order vacating an $11 million federal default judgment. The plaintiff in this case was rendered a quadriplegic when he dropped a .25 caliber pistol on the front porch of his home in 1992. Mr. Ryan was not engaged until two years after entry of an $11 million judgment, when the plaintiff began execution proceedings against the defendant in Italy. The defendants showed that the judgment was void because the court lacked personal jurisdiction over the Italian gun manufacturer in the State of Louisiana. Critical to the jurisdictional issue was proving that Fratelli Tanfoglio, S.n.c. did not place the pistol or any of its component parts into the “stream of commerce” — a fact that the court initially held was precluded by default. See Jackson v. FIE Corp., 302 F.3d 515 (5th Cir. 2002). After appeal to the United States Fifth Circuit in 2002, where the district court’s initial ruling denying the motion to vacate the default was reversed, and four additional years of jurisdictional discovery, the judgment against Fratelli Tanfoglio, S.n.c was ultimately vacated by the district court and affirmed by the United States Fifth Circuit.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Forbes v. Cockerham, 2008-C-762 (La. 1/21/2009); 5 So.3d 839 – Mr. Ryan enrolled as appellate counsel following a $12.6 million jury verdict against the State of Louisiana. The case involved an intoxicated and recklessly speeding motorist that ran off Greenwell Springs Road, a highway known as “the most dangerous road in Louisiana.” The plaintiff, Joshua Forbes, was a nine-year-old boy who suffered the amputation of his right arm and catastrophic orthopedic injuries. The trial judge granted a JNOV, holding that the driver of the vehicle was 100% responsible. The Court of Appeal reversed and reinstated the jury verdict. Mr. Ryan successfully drafted a writ application to the Louisiana Supreme Court. After briefing and argument, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal and overturned the jury’s finding of fault. The State of Louisiana was held to be not at fault in the accident.
• U.S. Fifth Circuit: Bank of Louisiana v. SunGard Availability Services, LP, 08-30333 (5th Cir. 2009) – Mr. Ryan defended SunGard Availability Services in a seven-figure breach of contract claim brought by Bank of Louisiana. The bank claimed damages due to breach of a data recovery service contract following Hurricane Katrina. Discovery showed that no breach had occurred, and the district court (Hon. Mary Ann Vial Lemmon) granted summary judgment dismissing the bank’s claims. SunGard was also awarded damages for unpaid invoices as well as attorney’s fees and costs. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court in all respects.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Marcus Ryan v. Zurich American Insurance Company, 2007-2312 (La. 2008); 988 So.2d 214- Mr. Ryan enrolled as appellate counsel after a Louisiana Court of Appeal overturned a jury’s determination of $0 loss of future earning capacity and increased that award to $1.1 million. The defendants’ sole option was to seek a writ of certiorari from the Louisiana Supreme Court. Mr. Ryan successfully argued that the jury’s determination of the amount, if any, of lost earning capacity is an issue of fact subject to the manifest error standard of review, and they showed that the jury’s determination was supported by the evidence. The Louisiana Supreme Court agreed and found that the Court of Appeal inappropriately substituted its own judgment for the judgment of the trial court. The jury’s verdict of “zero” was reinstated.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Williamson v. Haynes Best Western, 2006-1928 (La.2006); 940 So.2d 648 – Mr. Ryan drafted a successful writ application to the Louisiana Supreme Court, which granted summary judgment and “drove a stake through the heart” of a case described by the United States Fifth Circuit as an “immortal vampire.” See St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. Williamson, 332 F.3d 304, 310 (5th Cir. 2003). The plaintiff, Sonya Williamson, asserted that she was rendered a quadriplegic after being shocked by a hanging lamp in an Alexandria, Louisiana, hotel. Subsequent discovery revealed perhaps the most lengthy and well-documented enterprise of insurance fraud in Louisiana history. See Williamson v. Haynes Best Western, 688 So.2d 1201 (La.App 4th Cir. 1997). The ensuing litigation lasted sixteen years and touched every judicial venue in Louisiana before the Louisiana Supreme Court granted the defendant’s writ application.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Green v. K-Mart, 2003-C-2495 (La. 5/25/04); 874 So.2d 838 – Mr. Ryan drafted two successful writ applications to the Louisiana Supreme Court. He was engaged as appeal counsel after the Third Circuit Court of Appeal had increased a judgment against K-Mart from $1,000,000 to $3,458,453 in a closed-head injury case. Mr. Ryan initially showed that the appeals court erred by having argument in spite of the automatic stay of K-Mart’s bankruptcy. Green v. K-Mart Corp., 840-So.2d 1209 (La.4/4/03). The Supreme Court remanded the case for reargument, and the Third Circuit again increased damages by nearly $2.5 million. Mr. Ryan drafted a second writ to the Louisiana Supreme Court and was able to show that the Court of Appeal had clearly erred in increasing the plaintiff’s award for future medical expenses.
• Louisiana First Circuit: Capone v. Ormet Corp., 2001-0060 (La.App. 1 Cir. 6/21/02); 822 So.2d 684 – In this case, a plaintiff lost control of his vehicle on a rainy day, running off the road and striking a steel conveyor support in front of Ormet Corporation’s alumina plant. At trial, the plaintiff asserted that the operations of Ormet Corp. placed a “slippery red dust” on the roadway which caused the plaintiff to lose control of his vehicle. The trial court assessed fault as 70% to Ormet, 20% to DOTD, and 10% to the plaintiff, and awarded the plaintiff $798,748.11. Mr. Ryan subsequently enrolled as appellate counsel for Ormet, and he was able to demonstrate to the appellate court that the trial court was clearly wrong in finding that “fugitive red dust” was a cause of the accident. The 25-page opinion held that the plaintiff was solely at fault in causing the accident, and Ormet was absolved of liability.
• Louisiana Fourth Circuit: Estate of Cristodoro v. Gold Kist, Inc., 819 So.2d 1034 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1/23/02) – Mr. Ryan defended his client when the plaintiffs’ decedent was killed in a head-on collision with the defendant’s tractor trailer in rural Georgia. After a five-day jury trial in Orleans Parish, a judgment of $2,500,000 was rendered in favor of the decedent’s two teen-aged sons, including an award of $175,000 for pre-impact fright. As appellate counsel for Gold Kist, Inc., Mr. Ryan drafted briefs which showed that the jury’s verdict was not supported by the record evidence but was rather based on speculative and inflammatory testimony. The appellate court held that the jury’s award was manifestly erroneous and reduced wrongful death damages to $1,084,205. The award for pre-impact fright was vacated.
• Louisiana Supreme Court: Morial v. Smith and Wesson, 2000-1132, (La. 4/3/01); 785 So.2d 1 Mr. Ryan was counsel for Glock, Inc. in noteworthy and unique litigation brought by the Mayor of New Orleans against the entire firearms industry. The lawsuit brought by Mayor Marc Morial in 1998 was the first such suit of its kind, and caused dozens of similar lawsuits to be brought by other cities and state governments. Mr. Ryan was a key member of the defense team responsible for researching and drafting the appellate briefs to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Following oral argument, Mayor Morial’s claims on behalf of the city were dismissed with prejudice. Mayor Morial subsequently sought certiorari from the United States Supreme Court, which was denied, ending the litigation.