Villatoro v. Deep South BH & R Enterprises, LLC
206 So. 3d 428
La. Ct. App.2016Background
- Villatoro sustained a work accident on May 31, 2014 and sought workers’ compensation benefits.
- The dispute centered on who employed Villatoro at the time of the accident and whether benefits were due.
- The OWC found DS & B Services, LLC employed Villatoro and awarded indemnity, medical benefits, penalties, and fees.
- Defendants challenged the employer-employee relationship and the award of indemnity benefits.
- The court reversed penalties and attorney’s fees for nonpayment of indemnity benefits/medical expenses but affirmed other aspects of the judgment.
- An appeal for increased appellate attorney’s fees by Villatoro was denied as untimely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Villatoro an employee of DS & B Services, LLC at the time of the accident? | Villatoro presumed employee status under RS 23:1044 and presented DS & B evidence. | No contract of employment; evidence pointed to Buezo as employer. | Yes; presumption rebutted? No, employer failed to rebut presumption; finding upheld. |
| Was Villatoro entitled to temporary total disability benefits? | Medical evidence supported disabling condition and off-work status. | IME suggested possible sedentary work and controverted the disability. | There was a reasonable factual basis for TTD; judgment not manifestly erroneous. |
| Did DS & B Services reasonably controvert the claim, justifying penalties and fees under RS 23:1201(F)? | Defendants admitted employee status and offered no valid reason for denial. | There was a reasonable basis to dispute compensation given conflicting evidence. | The claim was reasonably controverted; penalties and fees for this issue were reversed. |
| Whether Villatoro is entitled to additional attorney’s fees on appeal; timeliness? | Appellate work increased due to defense proceedings and should be compensated. | Timing and procedures for an answer to the appeal were not met. | Motion denied as untimely; no increase in appellate attorney’s fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Olivier v. Olivier Builders, 19 So.3d 573 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2009) (burden on employer to rebut presumption of employment; weight of evidence varies with context)
- Harrington v. Hebert, 789 So.2d 649 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2001) (manifest error review; great weight given to factfinder’s credibility)
- Veazie v. Gilchrist Const. Co., 878 So.2d 742 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2004) (clear and convincing standard for temporary total disability)
- Cortez v. East Jefferson General Hospital, 7 So.3d 707 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2009) (reasonableness of controversion in RS 23:1201(F) penalties)
- Jimmerson v. Johnson Storage & Moving Co., 142 So.3d 111 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2014) (discretion in awarding penalties and attorney’s fees; deference to WCJ)