Justin Reyes et al v. U S A A Casualty Insurance Co et al

W.D. Louisiana

Justin Reyes et al v. U S A A Casualty Insurance Co et al

DecidedJanuary 15, 2026

Docket2:23-cv-01782

StatusUnknown

This text of Justin Reyes et al v. U S A A Casualty Insurance Co et al (Justin Reyes et al v. U S A A Casualty Insurance Co et al) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Justin Reyes et al v. U S A A Casualty Insurance Co et al, (W.D. La. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION

JUSTIN REYES ET AL CASE NO. 2:23-CV-01782

VERSUS JUDGE JAMES D. CAIN, JR.

U S A A CASUALTY INSURANCE CO ET MAGISTRATE JUDGE LEBLANC AL

MEMORANDUM RULING

Before the Court is “Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Issue of Louisiana Tort Law is Applicable Law” (Doc. 55) wherein Plaintiffs, Justin Reyes and Ashley Reyes, through counsel who maintain that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law that Louisiana tort law is applicable in this matter. Defendants have not filed an opposition to the Motion and the time for doing so has now lapsed. BACKGROUND The instant matter concerns a dog bite/attack which occurred on December 31, 2022, on the Fort Polk army based located in Vernon Parish, Louisiana. Plaintiff’s state court suit was removed to this Court based on federal enclave jurisdiction. Plaintiffs seek general tort damages for their minor son, damages pursuant to Louisiana Civil Code article 2315.6, and loss of consortium. LAW AND ANALYSIS Plaintiffs argue that Louisiana law applies to this case citing Herrington v. Ashley, Civil Action 2:17-643, 2020 WL 6707668 ()W.D. La. Nov. 13, 2020) wherein this Court applied state law to establish quantum on damages. /d. at *2. Plaintiffs note that the United States government 1s not a party in this case. Plaintiffs also rely on Chancellor by Chancellor v. Untied States, 1 F.3d 438 (6th Cir. 1993), in which the Sixth Circuit ruled that the United States could not be held derivatively liable under the Federal Torts Claims Act or be held strictly liable under the state statute because the United States was not the owner of the offending dog. As such, state tort law applied. Additionally, Plaintiffs rely on Phillips v. United States, 500 F.Supp.2d 668, 673 (W.D. Tex. 2006), wherein the federal court applied state law for a dog bite that occurred at Army housing. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that state law applies to this case. CONCLUSION For the reasons explained herein, the Court will grant Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Issue of Louisiana Tort Law is Applicable Law (Doc. 55). THUS DONE AND SIGNED in chambers on this 15th day of January, 2026.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION

JUSTIN REYES ET AL CASE NO. 2:23-CV-01782

VERSUS JUDGE JAMES D. CAIN, JR.

U S A A CASUALTY INSURANCE CO ET MAGISTRATE JUDGE LEBLANC AL

MEMORANDUM RULING

Before the Court is “Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Issue of Louisiana Tort Law is Applicable Law” (Doc. 55) wherein Plaintiffs, Justin Reyes and Ashley Reyes, through counsel who maintain that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law that Louisiana tort law is applicable in this matter. Defendants have not filed an opposition to the Motion and the time for doing so has now lapsed. BACKGROUND The instant matter concerns a dog bite/attack which occurred on December 31, 2022, on the Fort Polk army based located in Vernon Parish, Louisiana. Plaintiff’s state court suit was removed to this Court based on federal enclave jurisdiction. Plaintiffs seek general tort damages for their minor son, damages pursuant to Louisiana Civil Code article 2315.6, and loss of consortium. LAW AND ANALYSIS Plaintiffs argue that Louisiana law applies to this case citing Herrington v. Ashley, Civil Action 2:17-643, 2020 WL 6707668 ()W.D. La. Nov. 13, 2020) wherein this Court applied state law to establish quantum on damages. /d. at *2. Plaintiffs note that the United States government 1s not a party in this case. Plaintiffs also rely on Chancellor by Chancellor v. Untied States, 1 F.3d 438 (6th Cir. 1993), in which the Sixth Circuit ruled that the United States could not be held derivatively liable under the Federal Torts Claims Act or be held strictly liable under the state statute because the United States was not the owner of the offending dog. As such, state tort law applied. Additionally, Plaintiffs rely on Phillips v. United States, 500 F.Supp.2d 668, 673 (W.D. Tex. 2006), wherein the federal court applied state law for a dog bite that occurred at Army housing. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that state law applies to this case. CONCLUSION For the reasons explained herein, the Court will grant Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Issue of Louisiana Tort Law is Applicable Law (Doc. 55). THUS DONE AND SIGNED in chambers on this 15th day of January, 2026.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Justin Reyes et al v. U S A A Casualty Insurance Co et al, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/justin-reyes-et-al-v-u-s-a-a-casualty-insurance-co-et-al-lawd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack