Ainsworth v. Government Employees Ins. Co.

433 So. 2d 709
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedJune 10, 1983
Docket83-C-0853
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 433 So. 2d 709 (Ainsworth v. Government Employees Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ainsworth v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 433 So. 2d 709 (La. 1983).

Opinion

433 So.2d 709 (1983)

Jack AINSWORTH In his Capacity as the Administrator of the Estate of His Minor Child, Denise Ainsworth
v.
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.

No. 83-C-0853.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 10, 1983.

PER CURIAM.

The sole issue presented in plaintiff's writ application is whether the Court of Appeal erred in awarding legal interest due to plaintiff from Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, plaintiff's uninsured motorist insurance carrier, from the date of judgment rather than from the date of judicial demand.

On May 23, 1983 this court handed down decisions in the consolidated cases of Block v. Reliance Insurance Co. and Faria v. Smoak, 433 So.2d 1040 (La.1983). In both cases we determined the plaintiffs were entitled to uninsured motorist insurance benefits.[1] In our decrees, we reinstated the judgments of the district courts, in effect allowing legal interest from the dates of judicial demand.

In the Block and Faria cases the date interest was to begin was not an issue, was briefed only by one defendant, but was not argued nor discussed in our opinion. That ruling was correct in allowing legal interest from date of judicial demand.

This writ is granted, and there is now judgment in favor of plaintiff Ainsworth for legal interest on the judgment against Aetna Casualty and Surety Company from date of judicial demand until paid, at Aetna's cost; otherwise, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is affirmed, 427 So.2d 1220.

NOTES

[1] On May 23, 1983 the application of Sentry Insurance Company, arguing that interest on an uninsured motorist coverage award was contractual in nature and should run from date of judgment, was denied. Chiasson v. Whitney, 427 So.2d 470 (La.App.1983), writ denied, 433 So.2d 179 (La.1983).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sutton v. Oncale
765 So. 2d 1072 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2000)
Dekeyser v. Automotive Cas. Ins. Co.
706 So. 2d 676 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1998)
Martin v. Champion Ins. Co.
656 So. 2d 991 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1995)
Sanders v. Wysocki
655 So. 2d 713 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1995)
Hogan v. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co.
607 So. 2d 747 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1992)
Porche v. Waldrip
597 So. 2d 536 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1992)
Tutorship of Price v. Standard Life Ins. Co.
569 So. 2d 261 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1990)
Shepard v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
545 So. 2d 624 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1989)
Darbonne v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America
452 So. 2d 801 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1984)
Landry v. Louisiana Hosp. Service, Inc.
449 So. 2d 584 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1984)
Wilkerson v. Clark
444 So. 2d 782 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
433 So. 2d 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ainsworth-v-government-employees-ins-co-la-1983.