Opinion ID: 1613753
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the petitions for damages

Text: Two lawsuits were instituted as a result of the accident. As to the first, Mr. Fontenot and his wife, Susanne Fontenot, filed a tort action [3] seeking damages against Mr. Brooks and his insurance carrier, Patterson Insurance Company (hereafter, Patterson Insurance), asserting Mr. Brooks's negligent operation of his vehicle in failing to stop at the red light and/or proceeding into the intersection in the path of Mr. Fontenot's vehicle resulted in their damages. In a supplemental and amending petition, the Fontenots named as an additional defendant, among others, [4] the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development (hereafter, DOTD). They alleged the intersection was unreasonably dangerous due to an inappropriate traffic signal and insufficient street markings. LCG filed a third party demand and intervention against each of the named defendants seeking reimbursement of workers' compensation benefits paid to Mr. Fontenot. Following the insolvency of Patterson Insurance, the Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (hereafter, LIGA) was substituted in its place as a defendant. See La. R.S. 22:1375, et seq. The second suit was filed against Mr. Fontenot and LCG by Mr. Brooks and Leona Phillips, Charlotte's mother, seeking personal injury and wrongful death damages, respectively. The parties alleged Mr. Fontenot's negligent operation of his police vehicle, stemming from his excessive speed and failure to keep a proper look out, caused the accident. LCG filed a reconventional demand against Mr. Brooks and his insurer seeking monetary recovery for damages to its police vehicle and worker's compensation benefits paid to Mr. Fontenot. LCG also filed a third party demand against the DOTD, which prompted Mr. Brooks and Ms. Phillips to file an amending petition adding the DOTD as a defendant, citing the defectiveness of the intersection.