Marange v. Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc.
93 So. 3d 1253
La.2012Background
- Henry Marange claimed a work-related back injury from grinding a large cone-shaped vessel at Custom Metal Fabricators, Inc.
- Marange testified he slipped on grinding dust while standing with a heavy seven-inch grinder at shoulder level, causing injury.
- He did not report the accident promptly and left work to care for his ill mother, later requiring medical attention the next day.
- Co-workers testified to typical grinding practices (often seated, not overhead) and questioned whether standing overhead grinding occurred.
- OWC found in favor of Custom Metal, ruling Marange failed to prove an accident by a preponderance of the evidence; the Court of Appeal reversed and awarded benefits.
- The Louisiana Supreme Court granted certiorari and reinstated the OWC judgment, reversing the Court of Appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Marange established a work accident by a preponderance of the evidence. | Marange's uncontradicted testimony supports an overhead grinding accident. | Witnesses showed overhead grinding was unusual; corroboration failed; failure to report undermines credibility. | OWC findings reasonable; court of appeal erred in reversal. |
| Proper standard of appellate review for credibility determinations in workers' compensation cases. | Trial court credibility should support the finding if reasonable. | Appellate court may reweigh evidence if credibility is lacking. | Courts must defer to the tribunal’s credibility findings; canter framework applied; no manifest error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bruno v. Harbert International, Inc., 593 So.2d 357 (La. 1992) (burden of proof in workers' compensation; preponderance standard)
- Ardoin v. Firestone Polymers, L.L.C., 56 So.3d 215 (La. 2011) (two-part test for uncontradicted testimony with corroboration)
- Canter v. Koehring Co., 283 So.2d 716 (La. 1973) (scope of deference to trial court findings; manifest error standard)
- Stobart v. State, Through Department of Transportation and Development, 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993) (reaffirmed Canter deference/manifest error framework)
- Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La. 1989) (manifest error and review of credibility; internal inconsistency may show manifest error)
- Housley v. Cerise, 579 So.2d 973 (La. 1991) (cannot disturb reasonable credibility determinations when record supports them)
- Sistler v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 558 So.2d 1106 (La. 1990) (general guidance on appellate review of factual findings)
- Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La. 1979) (reaffirmed deference to trial court credibility in factual resolutions)
- West v. Bayou Vista Manor, Inc., 371 So.2d 1146 (La. 1979) (emphasized deferential review of fact-finding on appeal)
- Reed v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 708 So.2d 362 (La. 1998) (appellate review of factual findings in tort/worker contexts)