Brown v. Lafayette Ass'n of Retarded Citizens
94 So. 3d 950
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Mrs. Brown, employed by LARC as a direct care specialist, claimed a work-related accident on November 3, 2009.
- She suffered a heart attack on that date and later developed neck/arm pain tied to her work.
- LARC and LWCC initially denied benefits and medical treatment requests, including surgery recommended by Dr. Juneau.
- A WCJ found a work-related accident and awarded indemnity, medical benefits, penalties, and attorney fees.
- On appeal, LARC/LWCC challenged causation, penalties, and the surgery denial; Brown cross-appealed for appellate fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Brown prove a work accident caused her injuries? | Brown argues causation by accident tied to lifting. | LARC/LWCC contend no direct accident causation. | Yes; causation and credibility supported by record. |
| Are penalties and attorney fees proper? | Brown contends penalties/fees warranted due to denial of benefits. | LARC/LWCC argue non-arbitrary handling and no penalties. | Affirmed; penalties and fees upheld. |
| Is an additional penalty for withholding the surgery warranted? | Brown asserts failure to authorize surgery justifies extra penalty. | LARC/LWCC dispute separate violation for surgery denial. | Affirmed; additional penalty sustained. |
| Should Brown receive appellate attorney fees? | Brown seeks fees for appellate defense. | Defendants dispute necessity/amount of appellate fees. | Affirmed; awarded $5,000 appellate fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 56 So.3d 215 (La. 2011) (establishes burden of causation in WC actions)
- Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 721 So.2d 885 (La. 1998) (continuing obligation to pay benefits; penalties context)
- Parfait v. Gulf Island Fabrication, Inc., 733 So.2d 11 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1999) (continuing information defeats reliance on earlier favorable reports)
- Killett v. Sanderson Farms, 818 So.2d 853 (La.App. 1 Cir. 2002) (insurer/employer cannot ignore continuing disability evidence)
- Connor v. Family Dollar Store, 36 So.3d 339 (La.App. 1 Cir. 2010) (penalties/fees review on manifest error standard)
- Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La. 1989) (credibility findings given deference on manifest error review)
- Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1979) (two-part test for appellate factual reviews)
- Mart v. Hill, 505 So.2d 1120 (La.1987) (support for reasonable basis required for upholding findings)
- Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 558 So.2d 1106 (La.1990) (two-step analysis for manifest error review)