Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
PATRICIA ANNE JONES v. ETI, INC., WHEELER TILE CONSTRUCTION, INC., PRECISION SHORING, LLC, ROSS CONSTRUCTION & REMODELING, LLC
PATRICIA A. JONES v. ETI, INCORPORATED, ABC INSURANCE COMPANY, PRECISION SHORING, LLC, ATAIN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, RLH INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A LANDRIEU CONCRETE SERVICES, DEF INSURANCE COMPANY, ROSS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND XYZ INSURANCE COMPANY
I would affirm the trial court's judgment granting Defendants’ summary judgment motion and dismissing Plaintiff's claims against them. Plaintiff—Patricia Jones (“Ms. Jones”)—cannot identify what caused her to fall. Ms. Jones, in her deposition, speculates that the cement hose was “the force” that struck her. Such speculation is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. See Samuels v. United Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 14-0505 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/15/14), 2014 WL 5310497 (unpub.) (observing that plaintiff's “speculation as to the source of the substance or defect that caused his fall is insufficient to establish a genuine issue of material fact”); Maddox v. Howard Hughes Corp., 19-0135, p. 8 (La. App. 4 Cir. 4/17/19), 268 So.3d 333, 339 (internal citations, quotations, and brackets omitted) (observing that “[a]llegations that a non-moving escalator is more dangerous than stairs, inferences that since her feet were dry and it was the nearest exit to her vehicle, the escalator was the cause of her fall, and speculations that the escalator treads were not the same as stair treads are not sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact”).1 For these reasons, I would affirm the trial court's judgment granting Defendants’ summary judgment motion and dismissing Ms. Jones’ claims against them. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
FOOTNOTES
1. See also Smith v. Casino New Orleans Casino, 12-0292, p. 11 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/3/12), 101 So.3d 507, 514; Thomas v. Caesars Entm't Operating Co., Inc., 12-1202, pp. 3-4 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1/23/13), 106 So.3d 1279, 1284 (Ledet, J., dissenting).
LEDET, J, DISSENTING WITH REASONS
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: NO. 2024-CA-0520, NO. 2024-CA-0521
Decided: February 25, 2025
Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)