176 So. 3d 609
La. Ct. App.2015Background
- Shawn Johnson, a Wood Group mechanic, was injured in a boat collision on March 12, 2014 while traveling in Grand Pass (a navigable waterway).
- Johnson filed claims for benefits under both the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) and the Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Act (LWCA); the employers/insurers provided separate carriers for federal and state coverage.
- At the OWC hearing defendants filed a declinatory exception arguing federal exclusivity under La. R.S. 23:1035.2; the WCJ found the LWCA did not apply and dismissed Johnson’s LWCA claim with prejudice but did not expressly find LHWCA coverage.
- Parties did not dispute the injury occurred in navigable waters or that Johnson was acting in the course and scope of employment; dispute focused on the LHWCA “status” (and to a lesser extent “situs”) requirements.
- The LHWCA insurer had denied federal coverage at the time of the OWC hearing; Johnson argued dismissal with prejudice improperly extinguished his state remedy if federal benefits were later denied.
- The appellate court vacated the OWC judgment and remanded, instructing the OWC not to proceed until a definitive federal-court determination whether Johnson qualifies for LHWCA (or similar federal) benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether LWCA claim is precluded by federal compensation statutes (e.g., LHWCA) | Johnson: OWC erred; state claim should not be dismissed absent definitive federal finding | Defendants: Federal exclusivity under La. R.S. 23:1035.2 precludes state remedy if LHWCA applies | Court: OWC erred in dismissing state claim with prejudice before a definitive federal determination; vacated and remanded |
| Whether defendants proved LHWCA coverage (situs and status tests) | Johnson: Defendants failed to carry burden to show status/situs necessary for LHWCA coverage | Defendants: Injury occurred on navigable waters and employment was maritime-related, satisfying status/situs | Court: WCJ did not make express findings that LHWCA applied; appellate court did not resolve merits of status/situs and treated related assignments as moot |
| Whether Grand Pass is navigable (situs) | Johnson: Argued insufficiency of evidence that Grand Pass is navigable | Defendants: Grand Pass is navigable (connects Mississippi River to Gulf) | Court: Parties largely did not dispute navigability; appellate opinion accepts Grand Pass as navigable for purposes of discussion |
| Appropriateness of dismissal with prejudice before federal resolution | Johnson: Dismissal with prejudice improperly deprives him of state remedy if federal benefits denied | Defendants: Dismissal appropriate because concurrent jurisdiction no longer permitted; must be either federal or state | Court: Dismissal with prejudice was an abuse of discretion; vacated and remanded for OWC to await federal adjudication |
Key Cases Cited
- Flowers v. Coastal Cargo Co., Inc., 815 So.2d 198 (La. Ct. App.) (federal compensation scheme precludes state benefits under La. R.S. 23:1035.2)
- Bienvenu v. Texaco, Inc., 164 F.3d 901 (5th Cir.) (explaining LHWCA two-part situs and status test)