Articles Posted in Workers Compensation

pexels-rezwan-1145434-1024x683In a significant victory for the family of a deceased worker, the Louisiana Court of Appeal has overturned a previous ruling, ensuring they receive workers’ compensation death benefits. The case, Orozco v. Filser Construction & Aries Building Systems, Inc., centered around the complex issue of determining whether Serna Jr. was an independent contractor or an employee entitled to workers’ compensation benefits.

Case Background

Serna Jr. was working for his father’s company, Filser Construction, which was subcontracted by Aries Building Systems to perform work at a U.S. Navy facility. He was tragically killed while moving trailers on the job site. His alleged dependents, Mariana Orozco and Aggie Filiberto Serna Orozco filed a workers’ compensation claim against Filser and Aries.

pexels-pixabay-261621-1024x768Navigating the workers’ compensation system can be overwhelming when you’ve been injured on the job. You may be tempted to accept a quick settlement to cover immediate medical bills and lost wages. However, it’s crucial to understand the long-term implications of such a decision. A recent Louisiana case highlights the importance of carefully considering settlement agreements in workers’ compensation claims.

Benny Hernandez was injured at work in 2014. He initially filed a workers’ compensation claim, represented by an attorney, and reached a settlement with his employer and its insurer. The settlement was approved by a workers’ compensation judge, and Hernandez’s claim was dismissed with prejudice.

However, a year later, Hernandez filed another claim related to the same injury. His employer and insurer responded with a peremptory exception of res judicata, arguing that the matter had already been resolved. The court agreed and dismissed Hernandez’s second claim.

pexels-pixabay-163007-1024x591A recent Louisiana Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit decision underscores the importance of the “continuing jurisdiction” principle in workers’ compensation cases. In this recent opinion, the court overturned a Workers’ Compensation Judge’s (WCJ) decision to dismiss a previously adjudicated claim, highlighting the specific procedures and legal framework that must be followed in such cases.

Mr. Green filed a workers’ compensation claim after suffering a work-related accident in 2008. The case went to trial in 2009, where certain facts were agreed upon, including Mr. Green’s entitlement to benefits and the employer’s liability for a penalty. The court determined Mr. Green’s average weekly wage and awarded him attorney fees and court costs. This ruling was finalized in a judgment on October 14, 2009.

In 2014, both parties agreed to stay the case until further motions were filed. However, no motions were filed, and the case remained stayed for over three years.

pexels-chevanon-1108101-1024x682In today’s interconnected world, it’s not uncommon for employees to find themselves working across state lines. But what happens when an injury occurs in a different state than where the employment contract was formed? Whose laws apply? Can an injured worker sue their employer, or are they limited to workers’ compensation benefits? These questions were at the heart of the recent case Creel v. International-Matex Tank Terminals.

Richard Creel, an electrician, was injured while working at an IMTT facility in New Jersey. His employer, Versatech, was based in Louisiana. While Creel received workers’ compensation benefits in Louisiana, he also wanted to sue IMTT for negligence.

IMTT argued it was immune from lawsuits because it was Creel’s “statutory employer” under Louisiana law. Creel countered that New Jersey law should apply, and under that law, he had the right to sue. The initial court sided with IMTT, but an appeals court overturned that decision, sending the case back to the lower court for further review.

pexels-kelly-1179532-2898199-1024x575Contracting and subcontracting in the construction industry are standard practices. However, they can create several challenges when a worker is injured. What happens, for instance, when the employee of a subcontractor is injured by a device owned and operated by a municipal government unconnected to the construction project at hand? The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal recently addressed this question when a worker was injured by an overhead power line. 

Brendan Sharp was employed by RedIron Construction, a Legacy Construction Services subcontractor. Legacy had been hired by Cummins Mid-South Diesel in Morgan City to construct a building, and Legacy brought RedIron in to install metal siding on the structure’s exterior. Sharp’s injury occurred when he touched one of the metal siding panels to a live overhead power line owned by Morgan City.

Sharp sued for damages, naming only Morgan City as a defendant. Morgan City then filed a third-party demand against both Legacy and RedIron, arguing that Morgan City itself was not liable for any damages due to Legacy’s and RedIron’s failure to comply with Louisiana’s Overhead Power Line Safety Act (OPLSA). La. R.S. 45:141. RedIron and Legacy then filed motions for summary judgment, contending that they were, in fact, in compliance with OPLSA.

pexels-bruno-makori-774974101-25961335-683x1024When an employee suffers a work injury, it may result in negative consequences for the employee’s health. While Louisiana’s workers’ compensation laws allow the employee to recover damages for these future health complications, this has its limits. The employee must prove that this future negative consequence was related to the initial injury at work. This ensures that employees who are rightfully harmed are compensated while also protecting businesses from having to pay for every future medical problem the employee has.

Kym Hurst was a physical therapy assistant for Cirrus Allied in Lafayette, Louisiana. Ms. Hurst had a history of back problems, which she had previously sought treatment for. On January 6, 2010, Ms. Hurst injured her back while helping one of her patients.

Ms. Hurst sought workers’ compensation benefits from her employer and its insurer, Ullico Insurance Company. She was eventually awarded a lump sum of over $46,000 and weekly indemnity benefits. By February 2013, Ullico had stopped paying benefits and had ultimately been declared insolvent. Kentucky Insurance Guaranty Association (“KIGA”) took over for Ullico after the insolvency.

new_zealand_accident_insurance_0-1024x768If you are injured on the job, you might be entitled to compensation through the workers’ compensation system. What happens if your employer denies your claims for treatment recommended by your treating physicians? Can your employer be required to pay you penalties and fees?

Betty Citizen hurt her back while she was trying to move a bike while working at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart denied her physical therapy that her treating neurosurgeon recommended. She filed a 1009 Form, which the Medical Director denied for being untimely. Citizen then filed a 1008 Form, claiming she was entitled to receive attorney fees and penalties because Wal-Mart had arbitrarily and capriciously handled her claims. 

Once Wal-Mart formally denied her physical therapy, Citizen filed another 1009 Form. The Medical Director denied that request as well, finding there was no required documentation about the results of prior therapy. On the day of the hearing, Wal-Mart approved the recommended physical therapy. Therefore, the only issue was whether Wal-Mart had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying Citizen’s physical therapy. 

worker_masonry_concrete_stones-1024x691While involved in a legal dispute, there are strict timelines that must be followed, not only for filing an initial lawsuit, but also for filing any subsequent appeals. However, arguments can arise about what timeline applies to a certain factual situation. 

Angela Jackson was injured while working at Family Dollar. Jackson filed a claim against Family Dollar. The Office of Workers’ Compensation awarded her medical expenses, disability, and supplemental earnings benefits. It also awarded her attorney’s fees and penalties against Family Dollar. 

Family Dollar filed an appeal about a month and a half after the Office of Workers’ Compensation issued the judgment in Jackson’s favor. However, Family Dollar did not indicate if it was a devolutive or suspensive appeal. 

fire_department_resuscitation_1256591-1024x768Honesty is the best policy. This is especially true in the workers’ compensation space, because if you are found to have been fraudulent, you forfeit your right to workers’ compensation benefits. 

Before Alex Turner started working for Chicago Bridge, he completed the Louisiana Office of Workers’ Compensation Second Injury Questionnaire. He then started working as a carpenter’s helper for Chicago Bridge at a site in Hackberry, Louisiana. Approximately a month after he was hired, Turner injured his back while on the job. He immediately reported his injury to his supervisor and was taken to the onsite medical facility.

Chicago Bridge reassigned Turner to sedentary work. Turner complained the work still hurt his back because he had to lean over a table, so he refused to complete the sedentary work. He was eventually fired for insubordination. In Turner’s workers’ compensation case, the workers’ compensation judge found he was entitled to Supplemental Earnings Benefits and denied Chicago Bridge’s argument Turner had forfeited his right to workers’ compensation benefits by committing fraud. 

construction_worker_work_worker-1024x683When receiving medical care, the choice of medical professional can influence your treatment. If you have been injured on the job, you might not be sure if you can pick your own doctor or if you have to use a doctor your employer selects. Under the Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Act, an injured worker is entitled to select a physician in any specialty for an initial visit. The employer is not required to approve the employee’s choice of physician. What happens if the employer claims the employee was not injured on the job? 

Blann Kyle filed a workers’ compensation claim against Boise Cascade Company (“Boise”), claiming he had lost his hearing as a result of his employment at a paper mill located in DeRidder, Louisiana. He filed the claim seven years after he retired. Kyle then filed a motion for an expedited hearing, under La. R.S. 23:1121. Kyle claimed Boise had not authorized his initial visit with his choice of physician. Kyle wanted the workers’ compensation judge to order Boise to authorize his initial visit to the physician he had selected, reimburse him for the medical expenses resulting from the testing and treatment by that physician, and pay penalties and attorneys’ fees. Boise countered that Kyle’s claims were prescribed, meaning he had waited too long to bring his workers’ compensation claim. Boise also claimed it was not proper for Kyle to request penalties and attorneys’ fees with his motion for an expedited hearing. The workers’ compensation judge denied Kyle’s motion, holding there was a “tenuous link” between Kyle’s alleged hearing loss and his employment. Therefore, Boise had acted properly in refusing him the choice of a physician. Kyle filed an appeal. 

Louisiana courts have recognized that hearing loss can be caused by occupational exposure and can be an occupational disease where an injured worker is entitled to workers’ compensation. See Arrant v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc. Under La. R.S. 23:1121, an injured worker is entitled to select a physician in any specialty without his employer’s approval. If the employer denies that, the employee has the right to request an expedited proceeding. The employee can also receive attorney’s fees and penalties. 

Contact Information