249 So. 3d 1
La. Ct. App.2018Background
- Harrison sustained work-related injuries on April 14, 2013; a 2014 consent judgment awarded indemnity benefits and dismissed his disputed claim with prejudice.
- P2S terminated benefits in June 2015, alleging Harrison committed fraud by willfully making false statements to obtain benefits (La. R.S. 23:1208).
- At an August 7, 2015 deposition, Harrison testified he was not working and could not work; employment records showed he had been working as a foreman for Grand Isle Shipyard (hired July 20, 2015) and other employers.
- P2S moved for summary judgment alleging forfeiture of benefits under §1208; Harrison submitted a later affidavit claiming his deposition statements were inadvertent and described job-training and uncertainty about performing the job.
- The WCJ granted partial summary judgment: reinstating benefits and awarding penalties for the June 25–Aug 7, 2015 period, but finding Harrison committed fraud at the August 7 deposition and forfeiting benefits from August 7, 2015 forward.
- Harrison appealed the forfeiture ruling and challenged the court’s allowance of P2S’s amended fraud allegations; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Harrison forfeited workers' comp benefits under La. R.S. 23:1208 for statements at his Aug. 7, 2015 deposition | Harrison: statements were inadvertent, not willful, and not made to obtain benefits (benefits already terminated) | P2S: Harrison willfully misrepresented employment/ability to work at deposition to obtain benefits; employment records contradict testimony | Court: Forfeiture warranted — record undisputedly shows willful false statements made to obtain benefits; benefits forfeited from Aug. 7, 2015 forward |
| Whether Harrison's later affidavit creates a genuine issue of material fact to avoid summary judgment | Harrison: affidavit explains deposition as describing job training and uncertainty, not intentional misrepresentation | P2S: affidavit contradicts deposition and cannot defeat summary judgment without explanation/support | Court: Affidavit contradicted prior deposition and did not create a material fact issue; summary judgment appropriate |
| Whether P2S could amend its petition to add fraud allegations based on post-filing deposition testimony | Harrison: amendment was baseless, prejudicial, and deprived him of adequate notice/contradictory hearing | P2S: amendment merely leveled allegations based on deposition evidence; procedural rules permit amendment with leave | Court: Amendment properly allowed; no abuse of discretion, no prejudice, and Harrison answered amended petition |
| Standard for deciding §1208 forfeiture on summary judgment | Harrison: disputed facts (willfulness, intent) preclude summary judgment | P2S: summary judgment appropriate where records and deposition conclusively show false, willful statements made to obtain benefits | Court: Applied de novo summary judgment standard; employer met its burden and Harrison failed to raise factual dispute sufficient to defeat summary judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Lilly v. Allied Health Care, 991 So.2d 1096 (La. App. 1st Cir.) (summary judgment standards in workers' compensation cases)
- Revere v. Dolgencorp, Inc., 923 So.2d 101 (La. App. 1st Cir.) (La. R.S. 23:1208 encompasses false statements to anyone and is resolvable by summary judgment)
- Leonard v. James Indus. Constructors, 879 So.2d 724 (La. App. 1st Cir.) (forfeiture effective prospectively from time of misrepresentation)
- LeBlanc v. Dynamic Offshore Contractors, 626 So.2d 16 (La. App. 1st Cir.) (later affidavit contradicting deposition does not create issue of fact without explanation)