united states district court western district of louisiana lafayette ... › static ›...
TRANSCRIPT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTWESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
Bayard
versus
Cameron Inc
Civil Action No. 6:13-01536
Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst
By Consent of the Parties
AMENDED JUDGMENT
The Court’s March 6, 2018 Judgment in this action is Amended as follows:
The trial of this matter was conducted before a jury on February 26, 27, 28 and
March 1, 2018. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and against
defendant, Cameron Inc., finding Cameron Inc. sixty-five percent (65%) at fault,
Berard Transportation, Brayton Bayard’s employer, twenty-five percent (25%) at fault
and plaintiff Brayton Bayard ten percent (10%) at fault for the underlying accident.
The jury awarded Four Million Two Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Three Hundred
and 00/100 Dollars ($4,271,300.00).
In accord with the jury verdict rendered on the 1 day of March, 2018,st
IT IS ORDERED that judgment be and is hereby entered in favor of plaintiff,
Brayton Bayard, and against defendant, Cameron Inc., for any and all amounts
remaining from the Judgment of Two Million Seven Hundred Seventy-Six Thousand
Three Hundred Forty-Five and 00/100 Dollars ($2,776,345.00) , with pre-1
The Court reduced the Judgment in favor of plaintiff by Berard Transportation’s comparative fault1
(continued...)
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 153 Filed 03/12/18 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 2563
judgment interest on the amount of past damages from the date of judicial demand to
the date of entry of judgment at the Louisiana rate of judicial interest, as well as post-
judgment interest on the total amount of the judgment at the rate provided for by Title
28, United States Code, Section 1961, from date of entry of this amended judgment
until paid.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Judgment be entered in favor of
Intervenor, American Interstate Insurance Company, against Cameron, Inc. and
Brayton Bayard in the amount of $228,285.32, sixty-five percent (65%) of the total
amount of $351,208.18, with pre-judgment interest on said amount at the Louisiana
rate of judicial interest, as well as post judgment interest at the rate provided for by
Title 28, United States Code, Section 1961, from the date of entry of this amended
judgment until paid.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that American Interstate Insurance Company
recover sixty-five percent (65%) of any future benefits paid with judicial interest at
the rate provided for by Title 28, United States Code, Section 1961, from the date any
such benefits are paid until the judgment is paid.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that an amount not exceeding one-third (1/3)
of the amount of American Interstate Insurance Company’s award of $228,285.32,
plus judicial interest, shall be paid to the attorneys of Brayton Bayard for attorney’s
(...continued)1
of twenty-five percent and plaintiff, Brayton Bayard’s comparative fault of ten percent.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 153 Filed 03/12/18 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 2564
fees and costs in the case, including the cost of litigation and court costs.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that American Interstate Insurance Company
is entitled to a credit on all amounts received by Brayton Bayard, after deductions for
all amounts received from the judgment by American Interstate Insurance Company
and for amounts received by the attorneys of Brayton Bayard for fees and costs. It
is also ordered that American Interstate Insurance Company is entitled to interest on
its credit against future compensation at 6% per year.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Cameron Inc. is taxed with the
costs of this proceeding, as may be permitted under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, pursuant to
Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
JUDGMENT SIGNED this 12 day of March, 2018 at Lafayette, Louisiana.th
3.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 153 Filed 03/12/18 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 2565
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTWESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
Bayard
versus
Cameron Inc
Civil Action No. 6:13-01536
Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst
By Consent of the Parties
JUDGMENT
The trial of this matter was conducted before a jury on February 26, 27, 28 and
March 1, 2018. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and against
defendant, Cameron Inc. finding Cameron Inc. sixty-five percent (65%) at fault,
Brayton Bayard’s employer, Berard Transportation, twenty-five percent (25%) at fault
and plaintiff Brayton Bayard ten percent (10%) at fault for the underlying accident.
The jury awarded Four Million Two Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Three Hundred
and 00/100 Dollars ($4,271,300.00).
In accord with the jury verdict rendered on the 1 day of March, 2018,st
IT IS ORDERED that judgment be and is hereby entered in favor of plaintiff,
Brayton Bayard, and against defendant, Cameron Inc., in the amount of Two Million
Seven Hundred Seventy-Six Thousand Three Hundred Forty-Five and 00/100 Dollars
( $2,776,345.00) , with pre-judgment interest on the amount of past damages from the1
date of judicial demand to the date of entry of judgment at the Louisiana rate of
The Court reduced the Judgment in favor of plaintiff by Berard Transportation’s comparitive fault1
of twenty-five percent and plaintiff, Brayton Bayard’s comparative fault of ten percent.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 152 Filed 03/06/18 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 2561
judicial interest, as well as post-judgment interest on the total amount of the judgment
at the rate provided for by Title 28, United States Code, Section 1961, from date of
entry of judgment until paid.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Cameron Inc. is taxed with the
costs of this proceeding, as may be permitted under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, pursuant to
Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
JUDGMENT SIGNED this 6 day of March, 2018 at Lafayette, Louisiana.th
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 152 Filed 03/06/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2562
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 151 Filed 03/01/18 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 2558
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 151 Filed 03/01/18 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 2559
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
BRAYTON BAYARD
CASE NO. 6:13-CV-01536
VERSUS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST
CAMERON INC
MINUTES OF COURT: Jury Trial
Date: February 26, 2018 Presiding: Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst Court Opened: 9:30 a.m. Courtroom Deputy: Christina Chicola Court Adjourned: 4:20 p.m. Court Reporter: Cathleen Marquardt Statistical Time: 05:35 Courtroom: CR3
APPEARANCES Jerome Moroux For Brayton Bayard, Plaintiff Howard L. Murphy and Margaret Guidry For Cameron International Corp, Defendant Todd A. Delcambre (RET) For American Interstate Insurance Co,
Intervenor Plaintiff
PROCEEDINGS CASE CALLED: JURY TRIAL – DAY 1 PROCEEDINGS: Motions Ruled on Jurors selected and sworn to try the case Witnesses sequestered by agreement of counsel Opening statements by Plaintiff and Defendants Testimony/Evidence for Plaintiff began COMMENTS: The Court conducted voir dire and a jury of 8 jurors was selected. Preliminary instructions and stipulations were read to Jury. Counsel agreed to the rules of Sequestration of witnesses. The Court took up the Motion in Limine filed by Brayton Bayard (Rec. Doc. 130) and the Motions in Limine filed by Cameron International Corp. (Rec. Doc. 131, 132). Based on the agreement by the parties and reasons stated on the record; IT IS ORDERED that the Motions in Limine (Rec. Doc. 130, 131, 132) are DENIED AS MOOT. The Court then took up the Motion to Strike Defendant’s Supplemental Expert Reports filed by Brayton Bayard (Rec. Doc. 140). Based on the reasons stated on the record, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Strike (Rec. Doc. 140) is GRANTED.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 141 Filed 02/26/18 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1707
Robert Borison accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Safety Professional. The jury was released at 4:15 p.m. and ordered to return at 9:00 on February 27, 2018. Court was laid over until the next day and will resume at 9:00 a.m.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 141 Filed 02/26/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1708
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
BRAYTON BAYARD
CASE NO. 6:13-CV-01536
VERSUS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST
CAMERON INC
MINUTES OF COURT: Jury Trial
Date: February 27, 2018 Presiding: Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst Court Opened: 9:15 a.m. Courtroom Deputy: Christina Chicola Court Adjourned: 5:20 p.m. Court Reporter: Cathleen Marquardt Statistical Time: 06:40 Courtroom: CR3
APPEARANCES Jerome Moroux For Brayton Bayard, Plaintiff Howard L. Murphy and Margaret Guidry For Cameron International Corp, Defendant
PROCEEDINGS CASE CALLED: JURY TRIAL – DAY 2 PROCEEDINGS: Testimony & evidence for plaintiff, continued COMMENTS: Dr. Darrel Henderson accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Hand Surgery. Dr. James Blackburn accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Psychiatry. Dr. Cornelius E. Gorman accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Vocational Rehabilitation Counseling and Life Care Planner. Dr. Shelly Savant accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Life Care Planning. The jury was released at 5:20 p.m. and ordered to return at 9:00 on February 28, 2018. Court was laid over until the next day and will resume at 9:00 a.m.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 142 Filed 02/27/18 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1709
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
BRAYTON BAYARD
CASE NO. 6:13-CV-01536
VERSUS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST
CAMERON INC
MINUTES OF COURT: Jury Trial
Date: February 28, 2018 Presiding: Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst Court Opened: 9:00 a.m. Courtroom Deputy: Christina Chicola Court Adjourned: 5:30 p.m. Court Reporter: Cathleen Marquardt Statistical Time: 07:00 Courtroom: CR3
APPEARANCES Jerome Moroux For Brayton Bayard, Plaintiff Howard L. Murphy and Margaret Guidry For Cameron International Corp, Defendant
PROCEEDINGS CASE CALLED: JURY TRIAL – DAY 3 PROCEEDINGS: Testimony & evidence for plaintiff, continued and concluded Testimony & evidence for defendant, began COMMENTS: Dr. Denis Boudreaux accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Economics. At the end of Plaintiff’s testimony and evidence, the Court took up Defendant’s Oral Motion for Directed Verdict. For the reasons stated on the record, IT IS ORDERED that the Oral Motion for Directed Verdict is DENIED. The jury was released at 5:05 p.m. and ordered to return at 9:00 on March 1, 2018. Court was laid over until the next day and will resume at 9:00 a.m.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 144 Filed 02/28/18 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1710
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
BRAYTON BAYARD
CASE NO. 6:13-CV-01536
VERSUS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST
CAMERON INC
MINUTES OF COURT: Jury Trial
Date: March 1, 2018 Presiding: Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst Court Opened: 9:00 a.m. Courtroom Deputy: Christina Chicola Court Adjourned: 6:55 p.m. Court Reporter: Cathleen Marquardt Statistical Time: 05:40 Courtroom: CR3
APPEARANCES Jerome Moroux For Brayton Bayard, Plaintiff Howard L. Murphy and Margaret Guidry For Cameron International Corp, Defendant
PROCEEDINGS CASE CALLED: JURY TRIAL – DAY 4 PROCEEDINGS: Testimony & evidence for defendant, continued and concluded Evidence Closed Closing Statements Jury instructed Jury deliberations began at 4:30 p.m. Jury verdict returned at 6:50 p.m. Jury polled FILINGS: Witness List Exhibit Lists Jury Notes Verdict Form
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 145 Filed 03/01/18 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1711
VERDICT, RULING, COMMENTS: Dennis Howard accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Safety. F. Charles Frey, IV, Ph.D. accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Psychology The parties stipulated Michael S. Frenzel as an expert Vocational Rehabilitation. This stipulation was accepted by the Court. Dan M. Cliffe accepted by the Court as an expert in the field of Economics. The jury instructions were finalized by the Court and counsel. Thereafter, the jury was brought in. Closing arguments were delivered and the jury was instructed. The Court ordered that a meal be provided to the jury during deliberations. At 4:45 p.m., after receiving a note from the jury, a response was sent back to the jury at 4:58 p.m. to continue its deliberations. At 5:25 p.m., after receiving a note from the jury, a response was sent back to the jury at 6:30 p.m. to continue its deliberations. At 6:25 p.m., after receiving a note from the jury, a response was sent back to the jury at 6:34 p.m. to continue its deliberations At 6:45 p.m., the Court discussed with attorneys the previous jury response and at 6:51 p.m. an amended response was sent back to the jury to continue its deliberations. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff. The jury was released at 6:54 p.m. and Court was adjourned.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 145 Filed 03/01/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1712
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
BRAYTON BAYARD CIVIL ACTION NUMBER: 6:13-cv-01536
VERSUS JUDGE DOHERTY
CAMERON INC. MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHITEHURST
JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER
Trial Date: 02/26/2018
Pretrial Conference Date: 01/25/2018
Type of Trial: Jury
Estimate Length of Trial: 4 days
Trial Attorneys Attending:
Jerome H. Moroux on behalf of Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
Howard L. Murphy on behalf of Defendant, CAMERON INC.
Kenneth W. DeJean on behalf of Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
Todd A. Delcambre on behalf of Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
1. JURISDICTIONAL BASIS:
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD and Defendant, CAMERON INC.
Subject matter jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1332. The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 exclusive of interest and costs.
Plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, is a domiciliary of the State of Louisiana. Cameron International
Corporation is a company that was organized and exists under the laws of the State of Delaware
and maintains a principal place of business in the State of Texas.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 1 of 30 PageID #: 1514
Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
Jurisdiction for the captioned matter is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1332 as the amount in
controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and there is diversity of citizenship
among the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and defendant, Cameron International Corporation.
Jurisdiction for the Intervenor is proper under FRCP 24 as the Intervenor claims an interest
relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and is so situated that
disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair Intervenor’s ability to protect his interest
and/or has a claim that is incidental to the main action and shares with the main action a common
question of law and/or fact.
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
Jurisdiction for the captioned matter is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1332 as the amount in
controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and there is diversity of citizenship
among the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and defendant, Cameron International Corporation.
Jurisdiction for the Intervenor is proper under FRCP 24 as the Intervenor claims an interest
relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and is so situated that
disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair Intervenor’s ability to protect his interest
and/or has a claim that is incidental to the main action and shares with the main action a common
question of law and/or fact.
2. CLAIMS AND RESPONSES:
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
This matter arises from an incident that occurred on November 30, 2011 at an enclosed
facility owned and operated by defendant, Cameron, located in the Port of Iberia, Iberia Parish,
Louisiana.
On November 30, 2011, plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, was working as a driver and rigger for
Berard Transportation, Inc. (hereinafter sometimes referred to as “Berard”) on a job at Cameron’s
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 2 of 30 PageID #: 1515
enclosed facility that involved securing a large cylindrical vessel (sometimes referred to herein as
a “desalter”) on a mobile transporter known as a “Goldhofer.” The vessel was to be transferred
from Cameron’s manufacturing building to an adjoining storage yard owned and operated by
Cameron.
The job involved lowering the vessel onto the Goldhofer (also known as a “crawler”),
securing the vessel with wooden chocks and industrial chain, then transporting the vessel to the
storage yard. After the vessel was lowered onto the Goldhofer by a crane owned and operated by
Cameron, Brayton Bayard, along with his co-employees, Jacob Boudreaux, Henry Lee and Dustin
Lemaire, two unknown employees of Cameron (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the two
“unknown Cameron Employees”), and Ravis Belaire, Jr., another Cameron employee, wedged two
wooden chocks on each side of the vessel (four chocks total) to secure the vessel and prevent it
from rotating or falling while it was being moved.
After the chocks were in place, the next step to secure the vessel on the Goldhofer was to
wrap an industrial chain around each set of chocks, and use a ratchet binder (which consists of a
body and two threaded ends) to link the chain together and tighten it around the chocks, such that
the chocks were wedged firmly in place against the vessel.
This process of securing the wooden chocks by wrapping industrial chain around them
entailed employees of Cameron (the two “unknown Cameron employees” and Ravis Belaire, Jr.)
and Berard (plaintiff and Jacob Boudreaux) stationing themselves on top of the Goldhofer and
around the chocks, passing the industrial chain to each other and then using the ratchet binder
mechanism to link the chain together.
During this process, plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and Ravis Belaire, a Cameron employee,
were positioned around the chocks located on the left side of the vessel while plaintiff’s co-
employee, Jacob Boudreaux, and the two unknown Cameron employees were positioned around
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 3 of 30 PageID #: 1516
the chocks located on the right side of the vessel, which was on the opposite end of the Goldhofer
as plaintiff and Ravis.
Jacob Boudreaux and the two unknown Cameron employees, who were on the opposite
side of the Goldhofer as plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, wrapped the chain around the two chocks
located on their side, tightened it with the ratchet binder and then Jacob Boudreaux passed the
ratchet binder to Brayton Bayard in order for him to secure the chain around the two chocks located
on his side of the Goldhofer. (Exhibit 1, p. 97, 103 – 105, Exhibit 2, paragraphs 4-8, and Exhibit
3, paragraph 9). Brayton Bayard then hooked one end of the ratchet binder on the chain that was
wrapped around the two chocks located on the side of the Goldhofer that he and Ravis Belaire, Jr.
were positioned on. Brayton Bayard then attempted to attach the other end of the ratchet binder
onto the other end of the chain, and as he did so, a threaded connection of the ratchet binder
violently came apart from the body of the ratchet binder, causing Brayton Bayard to fall off the
Goldhofer and sustain serious injuries to his left hand and wrist.
At trial, we will present the expert witness testimony of Bob Borison, a safety expert who
has experience in the safe planning and execution of industrial jobs. Borison’s evaluation has
shown has recognized that Bayard may have Borison has examined the facts and testimony in
this case and has concluded that, among other things, Cameron violated industry and company
procedures when they failed to perform a pre-job safety analysis/meeting before the job began with
Berard. At trial, Borison will explain the importance of pre-job meetings and equipment checks.
It is beyond dispute that Cameron employees were participating with the Berard employees in
securing the load to the flatbed; as a result of their work, Cameron’s participation in this job process
required that
Brayton was injured and suffered a long and torturous ordeal in an attempt to get better.
On account of his injuries and the multiple surgeries to his wrist and hand area, Brayton’s prior
medical bills are approximately $185,000.00. Dr. Gorman has opined that Brayton will be severely
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 4 of 30 PageID #: 1517
restricted from returning to meaningful employment and will testify that Brayton’s ‘vocational
assets are low average and below and his wage potentials are entry/re-entry level.’ Dr. Denis
Boudreaux, an economics professor, has evaluated Brayton’s special damages as follows:
Past Medical Expenses $185,000.00
Future Medical Expenses $968,422.00
Past Lost Earnings $1,586,322.00
Future Lost Earnings $1,988,112.00
With respect to plaintiff’s general damages, plaintiff will present the trial testimony of Dr.
Darrell Henderson and Dr,Robbie LeBlanc. The accident discussed above caused tremendous pain
to Brayton and resulted in more than five surgeries which have severely limited Brayton . Over
six years after the accident, Brayton continues to have daily discomfort and pain in the site of
injury. The chronicity of the pain and his inability to work has caused him severe emotional
distress and sadness. At trial, we will present the medical testimony of Dr. James Blackburn to
help the jury understand Brayton’s emotional injury.
Defendant, CAMERON INC.
Defendant, Cameron International Corporation (hereinafter “Cameron”) contracted with
Berard Transportation, Inc. (hereinafter “Berard”), to move a desalter, a large cylindrical vessel
that was approximately 82 feet in length and 14 feet in diameter, and weighed 159 tons, from an
enclosed facility to an outside yard. Berard is an independent contracting company that specializes
in moving extremely large items using specialized equipment. Berard provided a transporter
vehicle, other equipment and personnel to move the desalter. Plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and Jacob
M. Boudreaux (hereinafter “Boudreaux”) were two of the members of a six-person Berard crew.
Bayard was employed by Berard as a rigger.
After the desalter was placed on the transporter vehicle, Berard personnel engaged in
securing the desalter using wooden chocks, around which chains were fastened, to hold the wooden
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 5 of 30 PageID #: 1518
chocks in place. Plaintiff and Boudreaux installed chains around the set of chocks located toward
the rear of the desalter. Plaintiff was positioned on the transporter vehicle on one side of the
desalter and Boudreaux was positioned on the opposite side. Two chains were used. These were
laid on the transporter and extended from the set of chocks on Boudreaux’s side to the set of chocks
on plaintiff’s side. Boudreaux attached the ratchet binder to the ends of the two chains on his side
and connected the chains to the ratchet the binder. In the process, he tossed or slid a ratchet binder
to plaintiff, that plaintiff was to attach to the ends of the two chains on his side. According to
plaintiff, he attached the end of one chain to the right side of the ratchet binder and he then pulled
on the ratchet binder to hook the opposite pin to the other end of the chain. When he pulled, the
pin to the right side of the ratchet binder separated and he fell from where he was positioned on
the transporter vehicle, landing on the floor.
When plaintiff was deposed, he testified the ratchet binder he was using came from a
Berard truck, where Berard equipment was kept, located on the opposite side of the desalter from
him (in other words, Boudreaux’s side). According to plaintiff, a Cameron employee handed the
ratchet binder to Boudreaux. Plaintiff has acknowledged that he did not see the ratchet binder
when it was taken from the truck and he did not see a Cameron employee hand the ratchet binder
to Boudreaux. Plaintiff also acknowledged that Boudreaux had passed the ratchet binder to him
under the desalter.
Boudreaux claimed there were two male Cameron employees on his side of the desalter
that were helping him by “doing what I asked them to do.” He did not know their names. He
thought the two men were new to Cameron because he had not seen them on the 10 to 20 times he
had worked in a Berard crew to move desalters at Cameron’s facility in the past. According to
Boudreaux, the chains and ratchet binders were taken from a truck or equipment bin located on
the opposite side of the desalter from where he was located (in other words, plaintiff’s side).
Boudreaux, like plaintiff, did not see who fetched the ratchet binders from the truck or the bin. He
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 6 of 30 PageID #: 1519
said the chains and ratchet binders were laid out on the floor about five to ten minutes before he
began to position the chains around the chocks. He said one of the Cameron employees picked
up the ratchet binder from the floor, handed it to him, and he passed it to the plaintiff. Boudreaux
saw nothing wrong with the ratchet binder before he passed to plaintiff. Passing the ratchet binder
to plaintiff involved Boudreaux flinging or sliding it about four to five feet across the surface of
the transporter and through the opening just beneath the desalter. Boudreaux estimated that
plaintiff fell about two and a half minutes after he had passed the ratchet binder to him.
Cameron’s defenses include a general denial of liability and the following affirmative defenses:
Cameron and its employees did not cause plaintiff’s alleged injury;
Plaintiff’s alleged injury is due to his sole fault, or alternatively, his comparative fault;
Plaintiff’s alleged injury is due to the normal risks and hazards of plaintiff’s employment;
Plaintiff’s alleged injury is due to the negligence or fault of others;
Plaintiff’s alleged injury is due to the negligence of plaintiff’s employer;
Plaintiff failed to heed medical advice and treatment protocols;
Plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages;
Credit or set-off as a result of release and/or compromise; and
Plaintiff’s alleged injury is due to a pre-existing condition.
Cameron denies that either it or its employees acted negligently. Cameron also denies that
either it or its employees owed a duty to plaintiff to inspect the ratchet binder or to ensure the pin
would not separate from the body of the ratchet binder, especially when the ratchet binder was
flung or slid by Boudreaux from one side of the transporter to the other and was then manipulated
by plaintiff to connect one end of the chain.
Additionally, Cameron claims the alleged incident arose solely from the actions of plaintiff,
who had extensive experience using ratchet binders. It was the responsibility of plaintiff to check
the ratchet binder before connecting it to the chain to ensure the pin was adequately threaded into
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 7 of 30 PageID #: 1520
the body of the ratchet binder. Although plaintiff could have backed out the pin and re-inserted it
to ensure an adequate thread connection existed, he did not exercise this precaution. It also was
plaintiff’s responsibility to take action to properly stabilize himself while positioned on or in
relation to the transporter, other than to use a ratchet binder attached to a chain as an improvised
support.
Additionally, Cameron retained a specialized independent contractor, Berard, to move the
desalter. Berard was exclusively tasked with the responsibility to secure the desalter to the
transporter prior to moving the desalter outside. Generally, a principal, like Cameron, is not liable
for the negligent acts of an independent contractor, like Berard, when such acts occur while the
independent contractor is performing duties under a contract. Because Cameron and its employees
exercised no operational control over the work Berard was performing, Cameron had no duty to
discover and remedy hazards created by Berard. Cameron also had no duty to ensure, through
instructions or supervision, that Berard perform its obligations in a safe manner.
Alternatively, Cameron contends that if plaintiff is not solely at fault for the alleged
incident, fault should be assigned to Berard for failing to provide a ladder or platform that plaintiff
could have used to connect the chains to the ratchet binder instead of plaintiff positioning himself
on the transporter and having to use the ratchet binder connected to the chain as a means of support.
Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
a) The law and any contractual provisions supporting the claim(s):
On or about May 6, 2014, the Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean, was employed as
co-counsel with attorney Michael L. Barras by the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, to
represent him in connection with the captioned matter. In connection with this
representation, the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard and the Intervenor, Kenneth W.
DeJean, signed a “Retainer Contract” which states, in the part, the following:
I. ATTORNEY accepts such employment and in consideration,
CLIENT agrees to pay to ATTORNEY as compensation a fee which
shall be a percentage of and shall apply to all of the total aggregate
recovery (both money and/or property) hereinafter made in this legal
matter as follows:
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 8 of 30 PageID #: 1521
331/3% of whatever gross amount is collected by settlement,
conference or negotiations prior to filing suit;
40% of whatever gross amount is collected if recovery is
made after suit is filed whether the matter is settled.
45% if case tried to verdict and thereafter.
The contingent fee shall be to ATTORNEY immediately when
recovery is made.
II. In the event this claim should be settled by compromise on a
structured settlement basis (i.e., payments over a period of time
through an annuity or other means), the contingency fee shall be
calculated based upon the value of the settlement at the time
settlement is made, and not upon the value of the structured
settlement payments over the payout period.
III. CLIENT authorizes ATTORNEY, in ATTORNEY’S discretion, to
incur and pay on CLIENT’S behalf for expenses related to the
prosecution of this claim such as, but not limited to, investigation
expenses, witness and expert fees, travel expenses, computer-aided
research expenses, mileage reimbursement, medical expenses, court
reporters’ fees, copying charges, bonds, long distance or conference
telephone expenses, postage, clerks’ and sheriffs’ fees, and, courier
service charges. In connection therewith, said ATTORNEY is
authorized to make direct disbursement thereof from any settlement
or recovery to pay such expenses and/or reimburse ATTORNEY for
such expenses he has previously advanced, or guaranteed on behalf
of CLIENT as well as any monies paid to or on behalf of CLIENT
or for CLIENT’S benefit or use, including but not limited to, living
expenses. Costs and expenses are to be taken out of any portion due
the CLIENT and are in addition to ATTORNEY fees. In the event
it is necessary to utilize a line of credit, all of the foregoing is subject
to the Case Expense Agreement signed by ATTORNEY and
CLIENT.
IV. ATTORNEY and CLIENT agree, in consideration for this Retainer
Contract, that CLIENT assigns and sets over in accordance with La.
R.S. 37:218, a security interest in this claim and cause of action to
secure payment of ATTORNEY’s fees and expenses owed under
this contract.
V. CLIENT and ATTORNEY agree that neither may, without the
consent of the other, settle or compromise the suits or claims which
are the subject of this employment agreement.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 9 of 30 PageID #: 1522
On April 29, 2015, the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard, and the Intervenor, Kenneth W.
DeJean, executed a “Case Expense Agreement,” which provided, in part, the
following:
III. In order to facilitate the payment of the case expenses, the medical
expenses, and/or the allowable living expenses, the CLIENT
authorizes ATTORNEY to utilize a line of credit in order to borrow
on behalf of the CLIENT, certain monies which would be utilized
to pay these expenses during the pendency of this claim. The
CLIENT acknowledges that the line of credit utilized in this case is
placed at Iberia Bank in Lafayette, Louisiana. In this case, the
ATTORNEY intends to utilize Iberia Bank, the interest charges for
the current year at this institution are 12% percent per annum.
IV. CLIENT agrees to execute the necessary documents, including
Powers of Attorney, which will allow the ATTORNEY to borrow
such money on the CLIENT’s behalf and to pay such vendors for
expenses, and to reimburse ATTORNEY for expenses related tot eh
CLIENT’s legal claim. The CLIENT authorizes the ATTORNEY
to pay and/or reimburse itself from CLIENT’s portion of ay
recovery through settlement, judgment, or otherwise for such
expenses, including interest charged from the banks. This
authorization is given in advance and authorizes the ATTORNEY
to utilize the line of credit without further authorization.
V. CLIENT specifically acknowledges that the interest as set forth
above will be charges by the bank, and that certain related loan fees
and other regular fees charges in the course of commercial banking
activity will apply. CLIENT authorizes the ATTORNEY to
withhold both the principal, interest, and related bank fees at the
time settlement is made and that all such interest, fees and expenses
are deemed to be expenses for the purpose of this contract.
VI. CLIENT agrees that should CLIENT discharge ATTORNEY for
any reason, CLIENT shall immediately pay off all such expenses
incurred by the ATTORNEY, as well as such loans with interest and
related expenses.
VII. In the case of living expenses, CLIENT understands that Rule 1.4(c)
governs ATTORNEY’s ability to utilize the line of credit to advance
the CLIENT’s living expenses. The CLIENT understands that only
those expenses related to food, shelter, utilities, insurance, medical
care treatment, transportation, eduation, or other expenses necessary
for living are allowable under the Louisiana Supreme Court rule.
CLIENT also understands that before such financial assistance can
be advanced, that the ATTORNEY must gather certain information
concerning the expenses and agrees to provide such information.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 10 of 30 PageID #: 1523
VIII. In summary, CLIENT acknowledges that certain expenses related to
this case, medical expenses, and living expenses are necessary to
prosecute this claim. CLIENT understands that the bank involved
will advance those living expenses and that such monies will be
placed in the trust account of the ATTORNEY. The ATTORNEY
will then pay out of the trust account the vendor or pay for the
expense in question. CLIENT understands that at the end of the
claim, when it is settled or paid, that the bank will have to be paid
back, including all interest fees, and other charges. The CLIENT
willingly consents to this arrangement and understands that it is
necessary for a successful prosecution of this claim. The CLIENT
further understands that all of this is done within the guidelines and
rules handed down by the Louisiana Supreme Court and Rule 1.4(c).
IX. The CLIENT agrees to sign this agreement along with the
ATTORNEY and acknowledges that he/she has been given a written
copy of this agreement, along with a copy of Rule 1.4(c).
Brayton Bayard also executed an Attorney/Client Line Agreement and Disclosure
with IberiaBank on April 29, 2015.
On or about January 18, 2016, Brayton Bayard discharged the Intervenor, Kenneth
W. DeJean, as his attorney.
On February 24, 2016, by Order of this Court, Intervenor was permitted to
withdraw as counsel of record for the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard.
Intervenor is entitled to and claims attorney fees in this matter that were
contractually agreed upon by Intervenor and Brayton Bayard, as per the signed
“Retainer Contract,” which is partially cited above. Additionally, Intervenor and
plaintiff secured a bank loan for case costs and expenses of Brayton Bayard for the
management of this case which remains due and owing.
Intervenor claims a right to reimbursement of out of pocket expenses and the
outstanding bank loan balance together with the agreed upon interest in addition to
attorney fees pursuant to the Retainer Contract between plaintiff, Brayton Bayard,
and Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean.
The claims of the Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean, are supported by the following
law:
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) and/or (b):
(a) Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to
intervene who:
(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute; or
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 11 of 30 PageID #: 1524
(2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the
subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as
a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its
interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.
(b) Permissive Intervention.
(1) In General. On timely motion, the court may permit anyone to intervene
who:
(A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute; or
(B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a
common question of law or fact.
Louisiana Revised Statute § 37:218:
A. By written contract signed by his client, an attorney at law may
acquire as his fee an interest in the subject matter of a suit, proposed
suit, or claim in the assertion, prosecution, or defense of which he is
employed, whether the claim or suit be for money or for property.
Such interest shall be a special privilege to take rank as a first
privilege thereon, superior to all other privileges and security
interests under Chapter 9 of the Louisiana Commercial laws. In such
contract, it may be stipulated that neither the attorney nor the client
may, without the written consent of the other, settle, compromise,
release, discontinue, or otherwise dispose of the suit or claim. Either
party to the contract may, at any time, file and record it with the
clerk of court in the parish in which the suit is pending or is to be
brought or with the clerk of court in the parish of the client's
domicile. After such filing, any settlement, compromise,
discontinuance, or other disposition made of the suit or claim by
either the attorney or the client, without the written consent of the
other, is null and void and the suit or claim shall be proceeded with
as if no such settlement, compromise, discontinuance, or other
disposition has been made.
B. The term “fee”, as used in this Section, means the agreed upon fee,
whether fixed or contingent, and any and all other amounts
advanced by the attorney to or on behalf of the client, as permitted
by the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Louisiana State Bar
Association.
In accordance with the requirements of La. R.S. 37:218, the Intervenor, Kenneth
W. DeJean, recorded his “Retainer Contract” in the Conveyance records of the
Lafayette Parish Clerk of Court on January 20, 2016 (File No. 2016-00002198) and
recorded a certified copy of the “Retainer Contract” in the Mortgage records of the
St. Marin Parish Clerk of Court on January 21 2016 (Instrument No. 494662).
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 12 of 30 PageID #: 1525
b) The remedy prayed for as to each defendant:
Plaintiff prays that after due proceedings are had, that there be judgment in
Intervenor’s favor awarding him attorney fees pursuant to the contingency fee
arrangement (“Retainer Contract”) and reimbursement of out of pocket expenses
and of the bank loan balance plus the agreed upon interest on said loan, as per the
banking agreement.
c) The law supporting that remedy as to each defendant:
1. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) and/or (b).
2. Louisiana Revised Statute § 37:218.
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
a) The law and any contractual provisions supporting the claim(s):
American Interstate Insurance Company is the workers’ compensation carrier for
Berard Transportation, Inc., plaintiff Brayton Bayard’s employer at the time of the
accident made the basis of this case. American Interstate Insurance Company has
paid, as of December 27, 2017, indemnity benefits totaling $164,829.55 and
medical benefits totaling $181,156.47. Indemnity and medical payments continue.
Pursuant to La. R.S. 23:1101(B), the payment of said benefits gives American
Interstate the right to recover amounts paid from any judgment or settlement in this
case. La. R.S. 23:1103(A)(1) provides that American Interstate’s right to the
proceeds of any judgment in this case take precedence over the right of plaintiff,
Brayton Bayard. To the extent that the judgment in this case exceeds the amount
paid by American Interstate for workers’ compensation benefits La. R.S.
23:1103(A)(1) also provides that American Interstate is entitled to a credit against
future compensation exposure and no future workers’ compensation benefits shall
be due until such time as the entire amount of the credit, computed at 6% per year,
shall have been exhausted.
La. R.S. 23:1103(B) provides that the carrier’s first dollar right of recovery shall be
satisfied from the entire judgment, without regard to whether damages are awarded
for items other than medical expenses and lost wages.
Because La. R.S. 23:1103(B) provides a first dollar right of recovery to American
Interstate, taking precedence over the recovery of Brayton Bayard, American
Interstate’s recovery also takes precedence over any recovery by Kenneth Dejean,
as Mr. Dejean’s recovery is derivative of Brayton Bayard’s recovery.
b) The remedy prayed for as to each defendant:
American Interstate prays that after due proceedings are had, that there be judgment
in American Interstate’s favor awarding a complete recovery of all workers’
compensation benefits paid to and on behalf of Brayton Bayard and that any
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 13 of 30 PageID #: 1526
amounts awarded in excess of American Interstate’s recovery be recognized as a
credit against future workers’ compensation exposure, computed at 6% per annum.
American Interstate also prays that the Court recognize its first dollar right of
recovery and award payment of American Interstate’s lien prior to awarding any
amounts to Brayton Bayard and Mr. Kenneth Dejean.
c) The law supporting that remedy as to each defendant:
1. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) and/or (b).
2. Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1101-1103.
3. ISSUES OF FACT AND ISSUES OF LAW:
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
A. Whether Cameron violated its own safety policies on the day of the accident;
B. Whether Cameron’s failure to outline safety policies for joint operations was a
violation of industry standards;
C. Whether Cameron violated its own safety policies on the day of the accident by
failing to perform a JSA before beginning the job.
D. Whether Cameron violated its own safety policies on the day of the accident by
failing to perform a JSA with Berard before beginning the job.
E. Quantum of damages.
Defendant, CAMERON INC.
A. Manner in which alleged incident occurred;
B. Whether Cameron had a duty, by virtue of an employee handing up a ratchet binder,
to ensure the pin was adequately threaded to the body of the ratchet binder;
C. Whether Cameron had a duty to supervise and direct the work of Berard, an
independent contractor;
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 14 of 30 PageID #: 1527
D. Whether Cameron had a duty to discover and remedy hazards created by or
attributable to Berard, when it exercised no control over the means and methods
Berard utilized to perform its work;
E. Whether Cameron had a duty to instruct Berard regarding how to perform its work
in a safe manner;
F. Whether Cameron had a duty to intercede in the work Berard was performing;
G. Whether the written terms and conditions between Cameron and Berard assign
exclusive responsibility to Berard to secure the desalter to the transporter;
H. Whether plaintiff was negligent for not adequately checking the threaded pin,
including unscrewing and screwing in the pin to the ratchet binder to ensure an
adequate threaded connection existed;
I. Whether plaintiff should have exercised his “stop work” authority;
J. Whether Berard acted negligently by allowing plaintiff to position himself on the
transporter when connecting the chain to the ratchet binder;
K. Negligence vel non of plaintiff;
L. Negligence vel non of Cameron;
M. Negligence vel non of Berard;
N. Comparative fault;
O. Causation;
P. Existence and extent of damages;
Q. Quantum of damages;
R. Whether plaintiff mitigated his damages;
S. Whether plaintiff followed the advice and treatment protocols of his medical
providers; and
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 15 of 30 PageID #: 1528
T. Whether plaintiff aggravated his condition through engagement in activities
unrelated to the alleged incident that occurred after the date of the alleged incident.
Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
A. The interest and/or amount of money owed to the Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean,
out of any recovery made by the plaintiff in this matter for his attorney fees, out of
pocket expenses and bank loan balance plus interest.
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
A. American Interstate Insurance Company’s first dollar right of recovery in the
amount of workers’ compensation benefits paid to and on behalf of Brayton Bayard
and American Interstate’s right to a credit for any award received by Brayton
Bayard in excess of American Interstate’s recovery. .
4. STIPULATIONS:
No stipulations at this time, however, the parties will attempt to enter into stipulations in
order to more efficiently present the matter at trial.
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
American Interstate Insurance Company has proposed to all parties a stipulation to the
amount and enforceability of its lien and is awaiting a response.
5. WILL CALL WITNESSES:
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
At this time, the Plaintiff believes he will call
A. Brayton Bayard – Plaintiff regarding the facts surrounding this accident.
B. Jacob M. Boudreaux, 8216 Jefferson Island Road, New Iberia, Louisiana 70560
C. Colin Findlay obo Cameron Corporation, 5300 West Sam Houston Parkway N.
Houston, Texas 77008, regarding Company safety and work procedures.
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 16 of 30 PageID #: 1529
D. Denis O. Boudreaux, D.B.A., Boudreaux Economic Consulting, Inc., 307 Suffolk
Avenue, Lafayette, LA 70508
E. Doctor Cornelius E. Gorman II, Certified Rehabilitation Counselor, Certified Life
Care Planner, Conservant Healthcare, 1100 Andre Street, Suite 302, New Iberia,
LA 70563
F. Shelly N. Savant, MD, CLCP, Conservant Healthcare, 1100 Andre Street, Suite
302, New Iberia, LA 70563
G. Robert E. Borison, Total Safety Services, Inc., 215 East Second Street, Unit 1, Pass
Christian, MS 39571
H. All medical providers, including Dr. Darrel Henderson, Dr. Robbie LeBlanc, Dr.
James Domingue, and James Blackburn.
Plaintiff reserves the right to amend the Will Call list, and pledges to inform defendants of
any decisions related to same.
Defendant, CAMERON INC.
[still under consideration]
Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
The following is a list of witnesses that the Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean, will call at the
trial of this matter:
1. Brayton Bayard
10914 Gondron St.
St. Martinville, LA 70582
(337) 522-3246
2. Michael L. Barras, Attorney
Oates & Marino
100 E. Vermilion St., Suite 400
Lafayette, LA 70501
(337) 233-1100
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 17 of 30 PageID #: 1530
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
The following is a list of witnesses that the Intervenor, American Interstate Insurance
Company, will call at the trial of this matter:
1. Haley Bethke, or other authorized representative of American Interstate
Insurance Company
Field Case Manager
American Interstate Insurance Company
2301 Hwy 190 West, Deridder, LA 70634
6. MAY CALL WITNESSES:
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD, may call the following witnesses:
A. Brayton Bayard – Plaintiff regarding the facts surrounding this accident;\
B. Jacob M. Boudreaux, 8216 Jefferson Island Road, New Iberia, Louisiana 70560
C. Colin Findlay obo Cameron Corporation, 5300 West Sam Houston Parkway N.
Houston, Texas 77008, regarding Company safety and work procedures.
D. Denis O. Boudreaux, D.B.A., Boudreaux Economic Consulting, Inc., 307 Suffolk
Avenue, Lafayette, LA 70508
E. Doctor Cornelius E. Gorman II, Certified Rehabilitation Counselor, Certified Life
Care Planner, Conservant Healthcare, 1100 Andre Street, Suite 302, New Iberia,
LA 70563
F. Shelly N. Savant, MD, CLCP, Conservant Healthcare, 1100 Andre Street, Suite
302, New Iberia, LA 70563
G. Robert E. Borison, Total Safety Services, Inc., 215 East Second Street, Unit 1, Pass
Christian, MS 39571
H. A representative of insurance company to testify regarding the policy of insurance
issued to Defendant, CAMERON INC.;
I. Any expert witnesses called by any party;
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 18 of 30 PageID #: 1531
J. Any and all of health care providers or representatives thereof on behalf of Plaintiff,
BRAYTON BAYARD, both before and after the subject accident, including but
not limited to:
a. Acadian Ambulance Service
b. Lafayette General Medical Center
c. Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Center
d. Plastic Surgery Associates
e. Laborde Therapy Center
f. Louisiana Orthopaedic Specialists
g. James H. Blackburn, M.D.
h. Park Place Surgical Hospital
i. James N. Domingue, M.D.
j. Lourdes Imaging Center
k. Envision Imaging of Acadiana
l. Acadiana Orthopedic Group
m. Surgery Center Inc.
n. Anesthesiology & Pain Consultants, LLC
G. A duly qualified representative of employer/former employers of Plaintiff,
BRAYTON BAYARD;
H. Any witness necessary for the introduction and/or authentication of any exhibit;
and
I. Any other witness listed by any other party.
Defendant, CAMERON INC.
Cameron may call the following witnesses at trial:
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 19 of 30 PageID #: 1532
A. Jacob M. Boudreaux
8216 Jefferson Island Road
New Iberia, Louisiana 70560
B. Ravis J. Belaire, Jr.
7880 Main Highway
Saint Martinville, Louisiana 70582
C. Jacques Lasseigne
1179-B Alexander Highway
Saint Martinville, Louisiana 70582
D. Jason Lopez
211 Titan Drive
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
E. Junius “Buzz” Joseph Moore, Jr.
6421 Theresa Comeaux Road
Erath, Louisiana 70533
F. Colin Findlay
Schlumberger
5300 West Sam Houston Parkway N.
Houston, Texas 77008
G. Jason Percle
5315 Curtis Lane
New Iberia, Louisiana 70560
H. Brett Berard
Berard Transportation, Inc.
6204 Daspit Road
New Iberia, Louisiana 70563
I. Records Custodian
Lafayette General Medical Center
1214 Coolidge Street
Lafayette, Louisiana 70503
J. Records Custodian
Robby D. LeBlanc, M.D.
Louisiana Orthopaedic Specialists
108 Rue Llouis XIV
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
K. Robby D. LeBlanc, M.D.
Louisiana Orthopaedic Specialists
108 Rue Louis XIV
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
Expert – Orthopaedic Surgery
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 20 of 30 PageID #: 1533
L. Records Custodian
Envision Imaging Acadiana
856 Kaliste Saloom Road
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
M. Records Custodian
Darrell L. Henderson, M.D.
Plastic Surgery Associates
1101 South College Road, Suite No. 400
Lafayette, Louisiana 70503
N. Darrell L. Henderson, M.D.
Plastic Surgery Associates
1101 South College Road
Suite No. 400
Lafayette, Louisiana 70503
Expert – Hand Surgery
O. Bao C. Nguyen, M.D.
856 Kaliste Saloom Road
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
Expert – Radiology
P. Denny J. Dartez, M.D.
856 Kaliste Saloom Road
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
Expert – Radiology
Q. Records Custodian
Metal Shark, L.L.C.
6816 E. Admiral Doyle Road
Jeanerette, Louisiana 70544
R. Dennis R. Howard
95 West View Way, No. 278
Highlands, North Carolina 28741
Expert – Safety
S. Michael S. Frenzel
Jennifer Palmer & Company
8315 Kelwood Avenue
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806
Expert – Vocational Evaluation and Rehabilitation
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 21 of 30 PageID #: 1534
T. F. Charles Frey IV, Ph.D.
Jefferson Neurobehavioral Group
Commerce Center
655 Perkins Road
Suite No. 500
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808
Expert – Neuropsychologist
U. Eric R. George, M.D.
Hand Center of Louisiana
4228 Houma Boulevard
Suite No. 600B
Metairie, Louisiana 70006
Expert – Orthopaedic Surgery
V. Dan M. Cliffe, C.P.A.
5210 Pitt Street
New Orleans, Louisiana 70115
Expert – Economics
W. Kenneth J. Boudreaux, Ph.D.
1424 Bordeaux Street
New Orleans, Louisiana 70115
Expert – Economics
Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
The following is a list of witnesses that the Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean, may call at the
trial of this matter:
Christa Simpson
Bookkeeper
Law Offices of Kenneth W. DeJean
P.O. Box 4325
Lafayette, LA 70502
(337) 235-5294
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
American Interstate Insurance Company reserves the right to call any witness listed by any
other party.
7. EXHIBITS:
Plantiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD, may introduce the following exhibits:
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 22 of 30 PageID #: 1535
A. A certified copy of the policy of insurance issued by insurance company to
Defendant, CAMERON INC.;
B. Cameron safety manual in force at the time of the accident;
C. Cameron purchase order No. 4510020477 dated December 7, 2011
D. Berard Transportation, Inc. invoice No. 11-3308 dated December 5, 2011
E. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0541B03 dated July 27, 2011
F. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0541D03 dated July 28, 2011
G. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH541D03 (two crane lift) dated August
2, 2011
H. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH541D03 (one crane lift) dated August
2, 2011
I. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH541D03 (moving of vessel) dated
August 2, 2011
J. Cameron overhead crane lifting plan dated August 2, 2011
K. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0541D03 dated August 4, 2011
L. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0553B03 dated August 8, 2011
M. Plaintiff’s medical recapitulation
N. Certified copies of any and all of medical records from both before and after the
subject accident on behalf of Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD, including, but not
limited to those records from:
a. Acadian Ambulance Service
b. Lafayette General Medical Center
c. Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Center
d. Plastic Surgery Associates
e. Laborde Therapy Center
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 23 of 30 PageID #: 1536
f. Louisiana Orthopaedic Specialists
g. James H. Blackburn, M.D.
h. Park Place Surgical Hospital
i. James N. Domingue, M.D.
j. Lourdes Imaging Center
k. Envision Imaging of Acadiana
l. Acadiana Orthopedic Group
m. Surgery Center Inc.
n. Anesthesiology & Pain Consultants, LLC
O. Copies of checks and/or cancelled checks and documentation evidencing any
payment(s) made under any medical payments coverage issued to Plaintiff,
BRAYTON BAYARD;
P. Any and all reports and documentation generated by any expert witnesses;
Q. Transcripts of any and all depositions taken in the instant matter including any and
all exhibits attached thereto and/or any and all statements taken;
R. Any and all pleadings and discovery filed and/or exchanged between parties in the
instant matter including any and all exhibits attached thereto;
S. Copies of any and all estimates of the vehicles involved in the accident;
T. Photographs of the vehicles involved in the accident;
U. Any and all Interrogatories, Request for Production of Documents and Request for
Admissions propounded by all parties and their responses to same with
attachments;
V. Any and all employment/personnel records of Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD;
W. Any and all demonstrative aids, including any enlargements of any listed exhibit,
charts, graphs, diagrams, or other aids;
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 24 of 30 PageID #: 1537
X. Any exhibit needed for impeachment purposes; and
Y. Any other exhibit listed by any other party.
Defendant, CAMERON INC.
Cameron may introduce into evidence or otherwise use the following exhibits at trial:
A. Cameron purchase order No. 4510020477 dated December 7, 2011
B. Berard Transportation, Inc. invoice No. 11-3308 dated December 5, 2011
C. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0541B03 dated July 27, 2011
D. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0541D03 dated July 28, 2011
E. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH541D03 (two crane lift) dated August
2, 2011
F. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH541D03 (one crane lift) dated August
2, 2011
G. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH541D03 (moving of vessel) dated
August 2, 2011
H. Cameron overhead crane lifting plan dated August 2, 2011
I. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0541D03 dated August 4, 2011
J. Cameron job safety analysis for job No. PH0553B03 dated August 8, 2011
K. Employment application to Berard Transportation, Inc.
L. Brayton Bayard resumè
M. Berard Transportation, Inc. job safety analysis
N. Berard Transportation, Inc. employee time sheet for Brayton Bayard
O. Occupational Safety Training, Inc. certificate issued to Brayton Bayard for rigging
safety
P. Occupational Safety Training, Inc. “rigger practical” form for Brayton Bayard
Q. Berard Transportation, Inc. employee safety manual
R. Photographs of ratchet binder
S. Exemplar of ratchet binder
T. Photographs of alleged incident
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 25 of 30 PageID #: 1538
U. Medical records of Lafayette General Medical Center
V. Medical records of Robby D. LeBlanc, M.D.
W. Medical records of Envision Imaging Acadiana
X. Medical records of Lourdes Imaging Network
Y. Medical records of Darrell L. Henderson, M.D.
Z. Employment records of Metal Shark, L.L.C.
AA. Income tax records of plaintiff
BB. Earnings records of plaintiff
Intervenor, KENNETH W. DEJEAN
The following is a list of exhibits that the Intervenor, Kenneth W. DeJean, will introduce
at the trial of this matter:
1. Retainer Contract, dated April 29, 2015, signed by Brayton Bayard and Kenneth
W. DeJean;
2. Joint Representation Acknowledgment signed by Brayton Bayard, Michael L.
Barras and Kenneth W. DeJean.
3. A copy of the recorder Retainer Contract between Brayton Bayard and Kenneth W.
DeJean, recorded in the Conveyance Records of the Lafayette Parish Clerk of Court
on January 20, 2016 (File No. 2016-00002198).
4. A copy of the recorder Retainer Contract, recorded in the Mortgage Records of the
St. Martin Parish Clerk of Court on January 21, 2016 (Instrument No. 494662).
5. An itemized listing of the expenses incurred by attorney Kenneth W. DeJean during
his representation of the plaintiff, Brayton Bayard.
6. Case Expense Agreement signed by Brayton Bayard and Kenneth W. DeJean on
April 30, 2015;
7. Attorney/Client Line Agreement and Disclosure of IberiaBank, signed by Brayton
Bayard on April 29, 2015 (Loan No. 4517116301).
8. An updated loan balance summary from IberiaBank for Loan No. 4517116301 that
will be current as of the time of trial.
9. Letter from Brayton Bayard to Barbara Bluffin of IberiaBank, dated April 29, 2015,
requesting to borrow money from IberiaBank from time to time under a Client Line
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 26 of 30 PageID #: 1539
of Credit issued in the name of Kenneth W. DeJean to pay personal living expenses,
medical expenses and/or litigation expenses during the pendency of his claim.
10. IberiaBank Client Line of Credit Application submitted and signed by Brayton
Bayard on April 29, 2015.
11. Receipt No. 06038 from Iberia Bank for the initial advance under the
Attorney/Client Line of Credit in the amount of $10,475.47.
12. Attorney / Client Line Activator dated January 12, 2016 in the amount of $2,457.04,
signed by Brayton Bayard and Kenneth W. DeJean (Activator No. 1003).
13. Attorney / Client Line Activator dated August 5, 2015 in the amount of $8,756.11,
signed by Brayton Bayard and Kenneth W. DeJean (Activator No. 1002).
14. Attorney / Client Line Activator dated May 18, 2015 in the amount of $4,259.46,
signed by Brayton Bayard and Kenneth W. DeJean (Activator No. 1001).
Intervenor, AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
The following is a list of exhibits that the Intervenor, American Interstate Insurance
Company, will introduce at the trial of this matter:
1. Medical and Indemnity payment history of American Interstate Insurance
Company. An updated payment history showing payments through the February
26, 2018 trial date will be introduced. Counsel have been provided with a payment
history through December 27, 2018.
2. American Interstate Insurance Company reserves the right to introduce any exhibit
listed by any other party.
8. OBJECTIONS TO WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LISTS:
Plaintiff, BRAYTON BAYARD
Plaintiff objects to all exhibits and witness testimony which would be in violation of this
Court’s forthcoming ruling on the Motion in Limine.
Defendant, CAMERON INC.
A. Cameron objects to the following witnesses and exhibits:
B. Objects to plaintiff listing of Cornelius E. Gorman II due to lack of timely notice
and lack of narrative report or a timely report;
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 27 of 30 PageID #: 1540
C. Object to Robert E. Borison due to lack of timely notice and lack of narrative report
or a timely report;
D. Object to listing of health care providers due to failure to properly identify
witnesses by name;
E. Object to plaintiff’s medical recapitulation on the grounds of hearsay, replication
of evidence and recapitulation is argument, not evidence;
F. Object to copies of medical records on the grounds they are hearsay;
G. Object to checks of medical payments on the grounds that they have not been
produced, not timely identified and are irrelevant;
H. Object to narrative expert reports on the grounds they are hearsay and are a
replication of evidence;
I. Object to deposition transcripts and exhibits attached thereto on the grounds they
are hearsay and witness has not been shown to be unavailable;
J. Object to any and all pleadings and discovery on the grounds description is vague
and is hearsay;
K. Object to estimates of the vehicles involved in accident on the grounds description
is vague and is irrelevant and is hearsay;
L. Object to any and all interrogatories and requests for production of documents on
the grounds description is vague and is irrelevant and is hearsay; and
M. Object to any and all personnel records of plaintiff on the grounds description is
vague and is hearsay.
9. COUNSEL AFFIRMATIONS:
Counsel for all parties affirm the following:
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 28 of 30 PageID #: 1541
A. That he or she is aware that exhibits are to be published to the jury by way of
CDROM or the Visual Presenter unless consent of this Court is obtained upon a
showing of impracticality or prejudice.
B. That he or she is familiar with the Visual Presenter and its operation or note the
date he or she has scheduled with this Court’s Courtroom Deputy for training.
C That good faith settlement negotiations have been engaged in within one week prior
to the pretrial conference.
D The need, if any, for handicap provisions that are provided by the Court
Respectfully submitted,
BROUSSARD & DAVID, LLC
/s/ Jerome H. Moroux
JEROME H. MOROUX (#32666)
557 Jefferson Street
P.O. Box 3524
Lafayette, Louisiana 70502-3524
PH: 337-233-2323
FX: 337-233-2353
EMAIL: [email protected]
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
BRAYTON BAYARD
Respectfully submitted,
DEUTSCH KERRIGAN, LLP
/s/ Howard L. Murphy
HOWARD L. MURPHY
755 Magazine Street
New Orleans, LA 70130
PH: 504-581-5141
FX: 504-566-4039
EMAIL: [email protected]
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT
CAMERON INC.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH W. DEJEAN
/s/ Kenneth W. DeJean
KENNETH W. DEJEAN (#4817)
417 West University Avenue
P.O. Box 4325
Lafayette, LA 70502
PH: 337-235-5294
FX: 337-235-1095
EMAIL: [email protected]
COUNSEL FOR INTERVENOR
KENNETH W. DEJEAN
Respectfully submitted,
LEBAS LAW OFFICES APLC
/s/ Todd A. Delcambre
TODD A. DELCAMBRE
2 Flagg Place, Suite 1
Lafayette, LA 70508
PH: 337-236-5500
FX: 337-236-5590
EMAIL: [email protected]
COUNSEL FOR INTERVENOR AMERICAN INTERSTATE INSURANCE
COMPANY
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 29 of 30 PageID #: 1542
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, counsel for Plaintiff, do hereby certify that I have this day filed the
above and foregoing document using the Court’s ECF electronic filing system.
Lafayette, Louisiana, this 11th day of January, 2018.
/s/ Jerome H. Moroux
JEROME H. MOROUX
Case 6:13-cv-01536-CBW Document 117 Filed 01/11/18 Page 30 of 30 PageID #: 1543