Sloan Abernathy is a top-rated defense litigator specializing in personal-injury defense, commercial auto and trucking, insurance defense, premises liability, product liability and professional negligence. He approaches litigation with a “finish line” mindset. With every decision or step, he strives to keep two questions at the forefront: how will this get us closer to a favorable resolution, and how are we protecting ourselves in the event of the worst-case scenario? Sloan fights hard for early resolutions and to achieve his clients’ goals and desired outcome. At the same time, he learned from his early days as a felony prosecutor that an effective litigator must have a trial-ready mindset at all times and be fully prepared in the event a pre-trial disposition cannot be obtained.
Sloan is a “jury psychology” nerd. After any trial, he immediately tries to talk with any willing jurors to get an idea of the mindset behind their decision and during deliberations. He has presented seminars and published articles on topics such as anchoring bias and reptile-strategy tactics, as well as the use of cutting-edge visual technology in response to juror expectations caused by CSI and other flashy legal shows. He firmly believes that a persuasive presentation ---- whether in a deposition, mediation, hearing or trial ---- requires the effective use of visual aids, whether it is a simple “yes/no chart,” timeline, photographic diagram or animated incident recreation prepared by an expert. He presents at seminars and CLE/CE events across the country and is a faculty member of the National Business Institute.
Sloan places a strong focus on effective motion and appellate practice to maximize his clients’ position and minimize potential exposure. He has obtained numerous favorable Daubert rulings to limit or exclude the plaintiff’s experts. These rulings often have included orders prohibiting testimony that would have been offered to support extravagant claims for future damages based on alleged future medical treatment or diminished earning capacity. Such decisions had the effect not only of weakening the plaintiff’s case and eliminating potential exposure, but also of yielding six- to seven-figure savings for Sloan’s clients.
Sloan does not hesitate to fully dive in to the field of the other side’s expert and think outside the box. He often has used online resources, such as the National Library of Medicine and crash test data published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Association, to cross examine and successfully challenge the other side’s experts and obtain favorable pre-trial rulings.
Before entering private practice, Sloan obtained a federal judicial clerkship which he completed after law school. He then worked for several years as a felony trial prosecutor, earning priceless courtroom and trial experience.
Outside of work, Sloan enjoys coaching his kids’ sports teams. He plays piano at church, and to his wife’s chagrin, likes to reminisce about his days as a bass player for an 80’s band while in law school.
- Samford University, Cumberland School of Law (J.D., 2012)
- Vanderbilt University (B.A., 2009)
- Louisiana
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
- U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
- Tennessee
Claims & Litigation Management Alliance
Jefferson Bar Association
Louisiana Association of Defense Counsel
Louisiana State Bar Association
New Orleans Bar Association
Eagle International Associates
- Louisiana Super Lawyers, Rising Stars List, since 2021
- The Best Lawyers in America©: Ones to Watch, since 2021
- New Orleans Magazine "Top Lawyers", Personal Injury Litigation, 2025
INSURANCE LAW
Writ grant – favorable appellate opinion addressing, for the first time, the extent to which 2024 tort-reform changes to Louisiana’s Direct Action Statute apply retroactively
Mr. Abernathy applied for and was granted interlocutory appellate review by the Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal on a res nova issue for that appellate circuit---namely, whether the 2024 legislative changes to Louisiana’s Direct Action Statute that generally repealed the statutory right of direct action against third-party liability insurers applied retroactively to actions arising prior to the effective date of the legislation. The issue turned on Louisiana Supreme Court jurisprudence addressing prospective versus retroactive application of laws depending on whether the new law is procedural or substantive, as well as constitutional jurisprudence governing when a procedural law can not be retroactively applied because it would divest the plaintiff of a vested property interest under the prior version of the law. Addressing the issue for the first time, the Louisiana Fourth Circuit of Appeal granted the writ application, ordered dismissal of the commercial-auto insurer Mr. Abernathy represented and further ordered that the insurer’s name be struck from the case caption and that any evidence regarding insurance coverage was inadmissible at trial.
Hurel v. Holton Bus, Orleans Parish Civil District Court No. 2024-08995, reversed La. App. 4 Cir. No. 2025-C-0049TRUCKING AND COMMERCIAL AUTO DEFENSE
TRIAL – defense verdict at auto-injury trial with suspected insurance fraud
Mr. Abernathy obtained a defense verdict during a commercial-auto injury trial in New Orleans wherein he represented a motorcycle dealer and its employee for alleged injuries the plaintiffs claimed they sustained in a collision they claimed occurred while the dealership employee was moving a commercially insured vehicle to a remote parking lot. Mr. Abernathy contended an accident never occurred and that the plaintiffs, upon observing a commercial vehicle in the dealership’s parking lot, fraudulently claimed they had been involved in a “hit and run” with said commercial vehicle. In addition to testimony from the responding state trooper and an accident reconstructionist, Mr. Abernathy presented evidence at trial of a prior accident the plaintiffs had staged using the same “hit and run” scheme. At the close of trial, a defense verdict was rendered in favor of his clients.
Dilling v. State Farm, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, No. 2016-3198Summary judgment obtained for truck driver and interstate carrier
Mr. Abernathy prevailed on a motion for summary judgment and dismissal of all claims brought against the driver and transportation company he represented in a trucking personal-injury case brought in state court. Mr. Abernathy successfully argued the transportation regulations which the Plaintiff relied upon to suggest a genuine issue of material fact as to the trucker’s liability were not intended to prevent or reduce the alleged risk the plaintiff encountered which caused him to crash and allegedly incur bodily injury.
Burnell v. C & K Logistics of Georgia, L.L.C., 22nd JDC (St. Tammany Parish), No. 2017-13598TRIAL – defense verdict for school-bus company and its driver
Mr. Abernathy obtained a defense verdict in a trial of a plaintiff-mother’s personal-injury claim for alleged an accident with the school-bus driver he represented. The trier-of-fact concluded, based on Mr. Abernathy’s cross-examination of the plaintiff, that the plaintiff lacked credibility and found the testimony of Mr. Abernathy’s bus driver and a third-party witness Mr. Abernathy was able to track down were more credible. Prior to trial, Mr. Abernathy successfully obtained dismissal of the injury claims the plaintiff had asserted on behalf of her three children who occupied her vehicle during the accident. He did so using technical arguments arising under Louisiana’s tutorship-vs-parental-authority regime and procedural rules governing the mode and procedure of asserting claims on behalf of minors.
Jordan v. NLFIC, et al., 2nd Parish Court, No. 122-43Daubert ruling limiting Plaintiff’s orthopedist and neurosurgeon so as to exclude evidence of $1.4M in alleged future economic damages
In a commercial-auto injury suit, Mr. Abernathy strategically deposed the plaintiff’s treating surgeons regarding their liberal projections on future disability and future care over the plaintiff’s 50+ year life expectancy and used that testimony to support a successful Daubert motion that limited the opinions of those experts. This ruling brought the potential exposure of Mr. Abernathy’s commercial driver and the driver’s employer from $1.6M in future economic loss down to $200,000.
Ozuna v. Pena, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, No. 22-cv-915Dismissal, with prejudice, of personal-injury suit against timber hauler and his employer for want of prosecution
After removing the suit to federal court, Mr. Abernathy filed multiple motions for dismissal and other relief based on the plaintiff’s non-compliance with multiple court orders and directives. He ultimately procured dismissal of the suit, “with prejudice,” which is the most severe and rarely imposed sanction for non-compliance with court orders. The dismissal subsequently was affirmed by the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeal.
Dillion v. Martin, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:23-cv-1727, affirmed U.S. 5th Cir. No. 24-30360Daubert ruling limiting plaintiff’s future economic damages
In defending a oversized-haul trucker in a personal-injury suit, Mr. Abernathy obtained a Daubert ruling limiting the opinion of the plaintiff’s treating pain-interventionist who had opined the plaintiff would need future interventional pain-management procedures and related treatment repeated over the course of his 40+ year remaining life expectancy. This ruling eliminated around half of the total future medical expenses claimed by the plaintiff, bringing the total from $449,244.76 down to $263,385.80.
Viaud v. Express One, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:23-cv-696Summary judgment obtained for church missions facility in commercial auto-injury case
Mr. Abernathy prevailed on a motion for summary dismissal of the plaintiff-driver’s personal injury action against the church missions facility that owned the commercially insured vehicle driven by the defendant-driver. Mr. Abernathy argued the deposition testimony and general evidentiary record did not genuinely dispute the fact that when the underlying collision occurred, the defendant-driver was on a personal mission and no longer in the course and scope of employment with Sloan’s client.
Campbell v. Delfred Harrington, 15th JDC (Vermillion Parish), No. C-111466Summary judgment for bus company under workers’ comp exclusivity statute
Mr. Abernathy was granted summary dismissal, pursuant to the Louisiana workers’ compensation exclusivity statute, of all tort claims brought against the transportation company he defended. He procured and presented evidence to convince the court there was no genuine dispute as to the fact the plaintiff constituted an employee, rather than an independent contractor, of the defendant bus company, and therefore, the tort claims were subject to summary dismissal because workers’ compensation benefits was the plaintiff’s sole remedy against the bus company.
Walker v. Araloi, et al, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, No. 2021-01646Dismissal of claims against transportation company and its driver due to plaintiff’s non-compliance with discovery order
Mr. Abernathy obtained dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims against a tour-bus driver and his employer, convincing the trial court the rare sanction of dismissal was warranted due to the plaintiff’s non-compliance with the court’s discovery order.
Richardson v. Nene’s Party Bus, N.O. 1st City Court, No. 2020-41Summary judgment for municipal transit company under principles of agency and vicarious liability
Mr. Abernathy obtained summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s personal-injury claims against the municipal transit company he represented. He successfully argued the evidentiary record established, without any genuine factual dispute, that the bus driver who allegedly struck and injured the plaintiff-bicyclist was an independent contractor, rather than an employee, of the transit company Mr. Abernathy was defending, and there was no legal basis to impute vicarious liability to the transit company for the alleged negligence of an independent contractor.
Levire v. Capital Area Transit System, et al, 19th JDC (East Baton Rouge Parish), No. 650509
Involuntary Dismissal with Prejudice in Auto-Injury Trucking Case
In an auto-injury trucking case in Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Mr. Abernathy secured an involuntary dismissal, “with prejudice,” of all of the plaintiff's claims.
Clara Williams v. Jeremy Meredith, et al., Orleans Parish Civil District Court
Summary dismissal of loss-of-consortium claim
Obtained dismissal of loss-of-consortium claim asserted by a plaintiff’s husband on the grounds that their marriage was not formalized until after the underlying accident.
Joan Cooper Rainey, et ux v. Sylvia Reed et al., Orleans Parish CDC, No. 2015-487
Summary dismissal of loss-of-consortium claim for no right of action
Through motion practice, Mr. Abernathy obtained dismissal of the loss-of-consortium claim asserted by the plaintiff’s husband on the grounds their marriage was not formalized until after the underlying auto accident.
Joan Cooper Rainey, et ux v. Sylvia Reed et al., Orleans Parish CDC, No. 2015-487
Dismissal of third-party demand against school-bus company and its driver
Mr. Abernathy prevailed on an exception of no cause of action which led to dismissal of a third-party demand asserted against his clients seeking contribution for damages claimed by the plaintiff for injuries attributed to a collision involving two commercial motor vehicles
Rhinehart v. Beverly Equipment Rentals & Sales, L.L.C., Orleans Parish CDC, No. 2017-658
Dismissal of consortium claims as time-barred
Mr. Abernathy prevailed on an exception of prescription that resulted in dismissal, with prejudice, of loss-of-consortium claims asserted against his clients by the plaintiff’s minor children and husband on the ground those claims were time-barred and did not “relate back” to the timely filed suit of the plaintiff-mother involved in the underlying collision with the truck driver whom Mr. Abernathy was defending.
Kathleen Hoffman v. Fabrissse Gregoire Oyeket, et al, Orleans Parish CDC, No. 16-12665
Discovery non-compliance
Mr. Abernathy, using motion practice, was able to eventually obtain a judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ injury claims against the commercial driver and transportation company he defended, due to the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with the court’s discovery orders.
Ramirez v. Gerard, 1st Parish Court, Parish of Jefferson, No. 158-905
Dismissal of personal claims against owner of trucking company and order limiting plaintiff’s experts
Mr. Abernathy prevailed on motion to dismiss claims brought against the individual owner of the trucking company he was defending, on grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction. Mr. Abernathy also obtained an order in limine precluding certain medical experts of the plaintiff from offering expert opinions and limiting them to testify only about their lay observations while treating the plaintiff.
Rodgers v. Hopkins Enterprises of MS., L.L.C., U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, No. 2:17-cv-6305
Summary judgment for commercial-truck rental company and sugar refinery
Mr. Abernathy obtained summary judgment and dismissal of the plaintiffs’ injury claims against the commercial-truck rental company and sugar refinery he defended. Relying on the Graves Amendment as well as principles of agency, he successfully argued those defendants could not be liable for alleged injuries the plaintiffs claim they sustained in a collision caused by the commercial driver who had rented the tractor-truck from Sloan’s client and was using it to haul sugar for Sloan’s other client.
Nieto-Rodriguez v. Gray, 23rd JDC (Ascension Parish), No. 111,215
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE
Secured Dismissal on Prematurity Exception in Medical Transport Injury Case
Sloan Abernathy and Karina Shareen successfully obtained a dismissal at the trial court level on an exception of prematurity in a case involving alleged injuries sustained in a medical transport van. They argued that the plaintiff’s claims, though framed as general tort claims, fell within the definition of “malpractice” under the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act.
Because the claims qualified as medical malpractice, Sloan and Karina demonstrated that the lawsuit was prematurely filed, as the plaintiff had not first submitted the claims to a medical review panel as required by Louisiana law. The court agreed and dismissed the matter.
This result carries significant implications. Because the plaintiff never initiated the required medical review panel process, the one-year statutory prescriptive period applicable to medical malpractice claims was not interrupted. As a result, any future attempt to refile the claims as a medical malpractice action is likely time-barred.
Summary Judgment Granted in Real Estate Disclosure Litigation
Obtained summary judgment and full dismissal of all claims brought against listing realtors arising from alleged failure to disclose prior hurricane damage in residential property transaction. Caronia v. Kaiser, No. 2021-4255, 15th Judicial District Court, Lafayette Parish, Louisiana (October 27, 2025).
Dismissal of claims in wrongful termination suit
In three different suits brought against Mr. Abernathy’s clients by terminated police officers of a local housing authority, Mr. Abernathy urged exceptions of no right and no cause of action, as well as lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which resulted in dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims under the Police Officer’s Bill of Rights, Code of Governmental Ethics and 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.
Stanley v. HANO, Orleans Parish Civil District Court
Thompson v. HANO, Orleans Parish Civil District Court
Scott v. HANO, Orleans Parish Civil District CourtDismissal of professional-negligence action against insurance broker
Mr. Abernathy, through successful motion practice, obtained dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim against the insurance broker and brokerage agency he represented on three alternative grounds: 1) failure to plead a cognizable basis for relief; 2) failure to file suit within one year of discovering the broker’s alleged negligence and breach of fiduciary duty; 3) preemption by federal law via the National Flood Insurance Act.
Caronia v. Wright Flood, U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana, No. 6:21-cv-4214
