Kepco Operating, Inc. v. Eubanks
58 So. 3d 1047
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Eubanks sustained a work-related injury on October 23, 2007, while employed by Kepco Mohawk Well Services, involving a smokestack lifting incident on a drilling rig.
- Kepco and Eubanks entered a compromise agreement two days after the accident, paying nine weeks of indemnity totaling $3,840.21 and starting weekly indemnity payments on April 16, 2008, in exchange for dismissing further indemnity, penalties, and attorney-fee claims through April 15, 2008, while preserving rights to future benefits.
- An April 28, 2008 WCJ consent judgment referenced the October 23, 2007 accident and allowed continued indemnity rights after April 15, 2008; Kepco later stopped benefits and sought to dispute disability attributed to the accident.
- From late 2007 to 2009, Eubanks received medical treatment at Huey P. Long Medical Center and from Dr. Boisvert; in 2009-2010, Dr. Muldowny and Dr. Mody offered conflicting opinions on causation and disability.
- Kepco filed a disputed claim in August 2008 and Kepco’s ongoing termination of benefits post-April 2008 led to penalties and attorney-fee awards for failure to reasonably controvert the claim.
- The Louisiana Court of Appeal ultimately reversed the WCJ, awarding Eubanks temporary total disability benefits from April 16, 2008, plus penalties and attorney fees, and upheld the compensatory judgments based on the parties’ prior consent judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the October 23, 2007 injury the cause of disability up to April 15, 2008? | Eubanks argues causation ties to October 2007 accident and is supported by the compromise/consent judgment. | Kepco contends other factors could explain disability and questions post-settlement. | Yes; the compromise consent judgment binds Kepco to disability from the October 2007 accident through April 15, 2008. |
| Did Kepco’s later assertion of alternative causes defeat the pre-April 2008 disability finding? | Eubanks maintains the compromise judgment forecloses post-hoc causation challenges. | Kepco argues new evidence or different causes undermine the earlier finding. | No; the consent judgment precludes re-litigation of disability causation relating to the October 23, 2007 accident. |
| Is Kepco liable for penalties and attorney fees due to improper termination of benefits after April 15, 2008? | Eubanks contends Kepco failed to reasonably controvert and terminated benefits without evidence. | Kepco asserts it acted within its rights based on medical information pre-dating April 15, 2008. | Yes; penalties and attorney fees awarded for failure to reasonably controvert the claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Plaquemines Parish, Government v. Getty Oil Co., 95-2452 (La. 1996) (consent judgment sanctity; finality governs post-settlement rights)
- Deville v. Rapides Area Planning Com’n, 715 So.2d 577 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1998) (consent judgments bind parties; final judgments may not be collaterally attacked post-entry)
- Cheramie v. Vegas, 470 So.2d 122 (La. 1985) (sanctity of consent judgments; limited grounds to challenge)
- Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc., 721 So.2d 885 (La. 1998) (reasonableness of controversion; when penalties/fees apply)
- Jack v. Prairie Cajun Seafood Wholesale, 967 So.2d 552 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2007) (evidence standard for proving disability and causation)