The exclusion of government owned vehicles from uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage thwarts the expressed public policy of the UM statute and is unenforceable. Thus the trial court errs in using the policy language (coverage does not include a vehicle owned by any government or any of its political subdivisions or agencies) to deny coverage. Mednick v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., Fifth (La.) Circuit, No. 09-CA-183 (1/26/10) (five judge court; Rothschild, J, dissenting)

Louisiana Supreme Court Forbids Cash Withdrawals from Lawyer Trust Accounts | Louisiana Legal Ethics http://bit.ly/5soAKz #
16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection – The Jury Expert http://bit.ly/4SmIV8 #

New Proposal Would Require Civil Defense Lawyers to Notify Plaintiffs of Settlement | Louisiana Legal Ethics http://bit.ly/6pht25 #
LADC North Louisiana CLE plans finalized. For details and to register, visit: http://bit.ly/8tnDns #

Plans for the LADC North Louisiana CLE program have been finalized. The program will be held on February 5–6, 2010 at The University Club in Shreveport. A total of 10.0 hours of CLE credit can be earned. A cocktail reception will also be held at the conclusion of the Friday program. Speakers include a number of Justice Jeff Victory of the Louisiana Supreme Court, and several other North Louisiana judges. For more information and to register, click here: LADC North Louisiana Seminar.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that disclosure orders adverse to the attorney-client privilege do not qualify for immediate appeal under the collateral order doctrine. Effective appellate review of such orders can be had by other means, including post-judgment review. An appellate court can remedy the improper disclosure of privileged materials by vacating an adverse judgment and remanding for a new trial in which the protected material and its fruits are excluded from evidence. In addition, a litigant confronted with a particularly injurious or novel privilege ruling also may ask the district court to certify an interlocutory appeal involving “a controlling question of law,” or may petition the court of appeals for a writ of mandamus, or may defy the disclosure order and then appeal from any contempt order. Mohawk Industries, Inc. v Carpenter, ___ U.S. ___ (2009) (Thomas, J, concurring in part)

New rules and legislation may one day require insurance-defense lawyers and their clients to notify plaintiffs directly of settlements. For more information, see  http://bit.ly/6pht25.

The LADC will co-host the Third Annual LSBA Conclave on Diversity in the Legal Profession, entitled “The Professional Workplace: Diagnosing the Issues and Finding the Cure.” The program is scheduled for March 5, 2010, at the New Orleans Marriott at the Convention Center (859 Convention Center Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130) from 8:00 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., with a networking reception from 4:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. The conclave, which should be approved for at least 6.50 CLE hours, will encourage discussion among judges and lawyers, primarily hiring and managing attorneys within law firms, about the importance of diversity (including areas beyond race and gender) within the legal profession and how to improve diversity within the profession in Louisiana. Additionally, during an interactive morning workshop, participants will gain tools that they can use to effectively maneuver diversity issues arising within their offices and in their practices. More information regarding registration will be available on this site in weeks to come.

In the case of an offending vehicle operated by its owner, once the insured claimant has proven the existence of the required primary policy of liability insurance for the offending vehicle and damages exceeding in monetary value the applicable limits of that policy, he has established a prima facie case for recovery under underinsured motorist coverage. At that point, the burden rests with the UIM insurer to put forth evidence of other underlying liability coverage, or evidence supporting a legal presumption of such coverage, sufficient to shift the burden back to the insured claimant.. Gillmer v Stuckey, First Circuit, No. 2009 CA 0901 (12/23/09) (McClendon, J, dissenting).