Calcagno v. Gonzales

802 So. 2d 643, 1999 WL 974471
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedNovember 8, 1999
Docket99-CA-287
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 802 So. 2d 643 (Calcagno v. Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Calcagno v. Gonzales, 802 So. 2d 643, 1999 WL 974471 (La. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

802 So.2d 643 (1999)

Joseph CALCAGNO, Jr. and Lynne Calcagno
v.
Donald A. GONZALES, Jr., ABC Insurance Company, et al.

No. 99-CA-287.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.

October 13, 1999.
Order Granting Rehearing for Limited Purpose November 8, 1999.

Charles A. Kronlage, Jr., Curtis C. Kronlage, New Orleans, Louisiana, for appellants Joseph Calcagno, Jr. and Lynne Calcagno.

Joseph C. Casler, New Orleans, Louisiana, for appellee Progressive Insurance Company.

Panel composed of Judges SOL GOTHARD, JAMES L. CANNELLA and THOMAS F. DALEY.

CANNELLA, J.

Plaintiffs, Joseph and Lynne Calcagno, appeal a judgment for damages in an automobile accident case filed against their uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM) carrier, Progressive Insurance Company (Progressive.) We reverse the denial of the motion in limine, affirm liability and amend the damages.

Plaintiffs were involved in an automobile accident on March 24, 1996. While traveling on Power Boulevard in Metairie, Louisiana, their vehicle was struck in the rear by an automobile owned and driven by Donald Gonzales.

*644 Plaintiffs filed suit on June 4, 1996 against Progressive, plaintiffs' UM insurer. Suit was amended to add Gonzales and his alleged insurer. However, it was subsequently discovered that Gonzales was uninsured.

Prior to trial, Progressive unconditionally tendered $27,000 and $2,500 in medical payments to Lynne Calcagno and unconditionally tendered $29,500 and $2,500 in medical payments to Joseph Calcagno.[1] On March 17, 1998, plaintiffs filed a Motion in Limine to exclude any evidence of the medical payments and the unconditional tenders. The trial judge denied the motion and on March 20, 1998, this Court denied relief, finding no error in the admissibility of the evidence.

A jury trial was held on March 18, 19 and 20, 1998, during which, the evidence of the medical payments and tenders were admitted. The jury awarded each plaintiff the amount of $500 for general damages and medical expenses to Lynne Calcagno of $1,038 and to Joseph Calcagno of $925.

On appeal, plaintiffs assert that the trial judge erred in allowing the evidence of the medical payments and tenders to be admitted. Further, they contend that this Court should perform a de novo review of the damages because of that legal error and the damages should be increased.

EVIDENCE OF TENDERS

The admissibility of evidence of compromise, settlement and tender are regulated by La.C.E. arts. 408, 409, 411 and 413. Under C.E. art. 408 A, evidence of an offer and/or acceptance of compromise of a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim or its amount, unless it is offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. C.E. Art. 409 provides that evidence of furnishing or offering or promising to pay expenses or losses is not admissible to prove liability, nor is it admissible to mitigate, reduce, or avoid liability, unless the evidence is offered solely for another purpose, such as to enforce a contract. C.E. art. 411 prohibits communicating the amount of an insurance policy to a jury, unless the amount of the policy is in dispute. Finally, C.E. art. 413 states that, "Any amount paid in settlement or by tender shall not be admitted into evidence unless the failure to make a settlement or tender is an issue in the case."

We find no cases directly on point to our issue. However, we conclude that even if evidence of the tenders were admissible under C.E. art. 409, as alleged by defendant, the evidence of the amounts is not admissible under C.E. art. 413. Further, this lawsuit is not to enforce a contract, which would make evidence of the tenders admissible under C.E. art. 409. This is a suit for damages. Defendant does not dispute that it owes anything under the contract. In fact, it has paid certain sums under the contract. Defendant here only disputes the amount to which the plaintiffs are entitled. The jury in this case was called upon to determine the whole of plaintiffs' damages, not whether the contract should be enforced. Further, considering the award by the jury, it is apparent that they considered the tendered amounts in reaching the verdict. Since this was legal, prejudicial error, we agree with plaintiffs that this Court must conduct a de novo review of the damages. Ferrell v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 94-1252 (La.2/20/95), 650 So.2d 742, 745-746 and cases cited therein.

*645 DAMAGES

At the time of the accident, Joseph Calcagno was 66 years old and Lynne was 55 years old. The couple had been married for 35 years and retired from a seafood market business which Joseph Calcagno had owned and worked in for 40 years. In their retirement, they enjoyed horse racing since they had owned racehorses in the past. The day of the accident, they were going to a local off track horse racing parlor. In addition, they had been considering seeking part-time work as casino card dealers and had attended a 5 week school to learn the skill. The couple have 2 daughters and 3 young grandchildren. Both had been in good health prior to the accident. Joseph Calcagno had not seen a doctor in 12 years, since he fractured his pelvis in an accident in 1981. Lynne Calcagno was being treated for a foot ailment, but neither of the plaintiffs had any prior neck or back problems and she had no prior chest or wrist injuries.

The Calcagnos testified that the Gonzales car struck 2 times with such force that Joseph Calcagno's hat flew into the back seat, as did Lynne Calcagno's wig and one earring. Gonzales tried to leave the scene by going around plaintiffs' car, but stayed when the couple told him to stop. He told them that he fell asleep at the wheel. Neither plaintiff felt the necessity to go to an emergency room, although Lynne Calcagno noticed slight discomfort in her neck, chest and wrist. After the accident was reported to the police, they continued on to the off-track betting establishment. There they socialized with friends and had dinner. Three to 4 hours later, both began to feel more pain and discomfort. His pain was in his neck and head. Her pain was in her neck, chest and wrist. The couple took some Tylenol and went home. Each testified that the pain began to escalate as the evening went on, causing headaches and nausea. They were forced to go to bed early. Lynne Calcagno said that, after she lay down, she could not lift her head when she tried to turn over. Joseph Calcagno subsequently notified Progressive of the accident because it did not appear that the tortfeasor had insurance.

Plaintiffs testified that each continues to suffer pain. Joseph Calcagno suffers with neck, back and hip pain and headaches, sometimes accompanied by nausea. He said that he has difficulty picking up heavy objects and cannot do anything physical, like washing the car, without having to lay down after for a few hours. Because walking hurts his hip, he cannot exercise on his treadmill anymore. The pain wakes him when he tries to turn over in his sleep. He believes that he will need surgery, but is delaying as long as he can. In addition, neither he nor his wife can pick up or play with their 7 year old and 8 month old grandchildren.

Lynne Calcagno suffered similar problems in her neck. She also sustained a wrist injury and a fractured rib. The rib hurt when she laughed, coughed or sneezed. At the time of trial, her wrist pain and rib fracture had healed.

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

Related

KP Auto Sales, Inc. v. ADG, LLC
185 So. 3d 308 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
McKamey v. Carona
169 So. 3d 449 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2015)
Alexander v. Tate
30 So. 3d 1122 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
Donald R. Alexander v. Ira M. Tate
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010
Collins v. Mike's Trucking Co., Inc.
934 So. 2d 827 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
802 So. 2d 643, 1999 WL 974471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calcagno-v-gonzales-lactapp-1999.