Iberia Medical Center v. Ward
2010 La. LEXIS 2606
| La. | 2010Background
- Ward, employed as a relief food service worker at Iberia Medical Center, sustained a left hand injury on February 3, 2006 while moving a large food cart near an elevator; the exact mechanics were disputed.
- Ward immediately informed a coworker and supervisor; supervisor documented an injury note and encouraged medical evaluation; Ward initially declined treatment.
- Ward received medical treatment, with emergency room and doctor notes diagnosing a contusion/sprain; she was given temporary work restrictions and later continued treatment.
- Dr. Cenac and Dr. Yerger opined Ward had sustained a traumatic injury with potential complex regional pain syndrome and reached MMI at varying times, leading to work- restrictions and advice on return to work.
- Iberia Medical terminated Ward’s indemnity benefits on September 5, 2006 based on Dr. Yerger’s opinion of MMI; Ward and Iberia’s disputes culminated in trial Oct. 15, 2008 and appeals; court rulings diverged on TTD reinstatement and penalties.
- The Louisiana Supreme Court ultimately affirmed the injury finding but reversed on reinstatement of TTD benefits after Sept. 5, 2006 and on penalties/attorneys’ fees, holding medical evidence supported MMI and return-to-work capability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Ward prove a work-related injury by a preponderance of the evidence? | Ward: injury linked to employment; contemporaneous reporting and medical findings support causal connection. | Iberia: inconsistent testimony and lack of corroborating physical evidence undermine causation. | Yes; court affirmed that Ward proved a work-related accident by preponderance. |
| Was Ward entitled to reinstatement of TTD benefits after September 5, 2006? | Ward contends ongoing disability and need for TTD beyond 9/5/2006 based on medical conditions. | Iberia: medical opinions showed capability to return to work; no evidence of ongoing total disability after 9/5/2006. | No; the court reversed the reinstatement of TTD benefits beyond September 5, 2006. |
| Did Iberia Medical act arbitrarily and capriciously in terminating benefits warrant penalties and attorney fees? | Ward argues termination was unfounded and surveillance video tainted medical opinions. | Iberia contends medical opinions, balanced with surveillance, supported termination; not arbitrary or capricious. | No; penalties and attorney fees were reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fabre v. ICF Kaiser Int'l, 835 So.2d 724 (La. Ct. App. 1 Cir. 2002) (surveillance considerations; limits of reliance on video to taint medical opinions)
- Buxton v. Iowa Police Dept., 23 So.3d 275 (La. 2009) (claimant must prove work-related injury by a preponderance; credibility issues assessed by fact-finder)
- Bruno v. Herbert International Inc., 593 So.2d 357 (La. 1992) (liberal interpretation of work-related accident requirement)
- Williams v. Regional Transit Authority, 546 So.2d 150 (La. 1989) (liberal approach to proving work-related injury; corroboration allowed)
- Morr is v. Cactus Drilling Co., 982 So.2d 957 (La. Ct. App. 3 Cir. 2008) (manifest error review of credibility and medical evidence)