Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Gauthier v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided March 14, 1990No. 88-1179Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKnoll, Judge

I agree with the majority that no bona fide dispute existed at the time of the settlement, therefore, the parties entered into a lump sum settlement discounted at a rate greater than 8% per annum, in violation of LSA-R.S. 23:1274(A).

For the following reasons, I respectfully dissent from the majority which denies plaintiff the penalty. LSA-R.S. 23:1274(A) is a mandatory statute “... shall not be discounted at a greater rate than eight percent per annum.” (Emphasis added.) It is well established that the term shall is mandatory. LSA-R.S. 1:3. In my view, the award of the penalty at one and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Puchner v. Employers' Liability Assur. Corp.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1941
  2. Fontenot v. Goldenstern Pipe & Supply Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1951
  3. Smith v. Intracoastal Truck LinesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API