Houston v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Houston v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc.

455 So. 2d 1235, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9438

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedAugust 29, 1984

DocketNo. C-2553

StatusPublished

This text of 455 So. 2d 1235 (Houston v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc.) 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

Houston v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 455 So. 2d 1235, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9438 (La. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

WRITS DENIED

BARRY, Judge.

Relator seeks an expeditious determination of whether plaintiffs injury (silicosis) “resulted” during and within the meaning of the insurance policy. It urges plaintiffs diagnosis of the disabling disease occurred long after the policy lapsed and summary judgment should be granted.

Faciane v. Southern Shipbuilding Corporation., 446 So.2d 770 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1984) held a cause of action arises sometime between the initial exposure and the date of diagnosis. Faciane said it was “error to dismiss liability insurer’s [sic] by summary judgment on the basis that no injury occurred during the effective dates of their respective policies until the date of the injury and its classification under those policies has been fixed”.

Therefore, when the injury “resulted” is a fact/medical question, i.e. a genuine issue of material fact, and summary judgment was properly denied. LSA-C.C.P. art. 966.

Relator also urges the release of its insureds caused it to be released.

Since relator is still a party to the suit, we pretermit this question. However, we note that the release explicitly reserved plaintiff’s rights against Commercial Union.

Relator’s application is denied.

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