Ceres Gulf, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Luther Fagan

111 F.3d 17, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6683, 1997 WL 169395
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 10, 1997
Docket96-60478
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 111 F.3d 17 (Ceres Gulf, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Luther Fagan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ceres Gulf, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Luther Fagan, 111 F.3d 17, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6683, 1997 WL 169395 (5th Cir. 1997).

Opinion

DeMOSS, Circuit Judge:

In this Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act case (“LHWCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., we review an order by the Benefits Review Board (the “Board”) affirming a decision of an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) in favor of an injured longshoreman. Because the timeliness of the longshoreman’s claim is not supported by substantial evidence, we reverse the Board’s order.

BACKGROUND

Luther Pagan was injured while employed as a longshoreman by Ceres Gulf. On June 10, 1988, Fagan was loading cotton onto a vessel when a hook knocked him in the head, cracking his hard hat. After the hit, Fagan felt dizzy and sat out the rest of his shift. The next day, Fagan worked four hours, and then, feeling dizzy, again sat out the day. On June 13, Fagan “blacked out.” When he awoke, he was sweating and unable to see. He went to the hospital but was discharged that evening.

The next day, Fagan went to see Dr. Charles Miller, a general practitioner who had been treating him for his pre-existing diabetes. Fagan told Dr. Miller that he thought his symptoms, which included nausea, double vision, and a headache, were caused by hypoglycemia related to his diabetes. Dr. Miller referred Fagan to Dr. Donald Lupin, an internist.

Dr. Lupin admitted Fagan to the hospital on June 14. A CAT scan suggested a cerebral hemorrhage, which Dr. Lupin interpreted as related to the hit on his head. Dr. Robert Applebaum, a neurosurgeon, examined Fagan in the hospital on June 15. Dr. Applebaum did not think there was any relationship between Fagan’s symptoms and the accident at work. Instead, he thought Fa-gan’s symptoms were caused by cerebral vascular disease brought on by his diabetes. On July 4, 1988, Fagan was discharged from the hospital.

Fagan’s neurological symptoms persisted after discharge, and he was unable to continue working. Fagan filed a claim for benefits under the LHWCA on June 27,1991, alleging that his neurological problems resulted from the work-related injury to his head. 1 The ALJ found in Fagan’s favor, holding that Fagan was disabled and that his disability was causally related to his employment. The ALJ also found that Fagan’s claim was timely filed. Ceres Gulf appealed, and the Board affirmed. Ceres Gulf now petitions for review of the Board’s order.

DISCUSSION .

As a threshold matter, we must consider whether Fagan timely filed his claim. A worker must file an LHWCA claim within one year after the injury. 33 U.S.C. § 913(a). However, “[t]he time for filing a claim shall not begin to run until the employee ... is aware, or by reasonable diligence should have been aware, of the relationship between the injury or death and the employment.” Id. In order to determine if prescription has run, “we look to the employee’s appreciation of the relation between his injury and his employment. For prescription to run against him, he must know (or should know) the true nature of his condition, i.e., that it interferes with his employment by impairing his capacity to work, and its causal connection with his employment.” Marathon Oil Co. v. Lunsford, 733 F.2d 1139, 1141 (5th Cir.1984).

Because Fagan was injured in June 1988, absent tolling, he had until June 1989 to file his claim. In the proceedings below, Fagan’s position regarding timeliness was two-fold. First, he argued that he did file a claim within one year of his injury. In the alternative, he contended that he did not become aware of the connection between his injury and his employment for over two years. Therefore, the prescription period did not *19 begin to run until July 1990, thus making his June 1991 filing timely.

Fagan argued to the ALJ that he filed an LHWCA claim on March 21, 1989. While the Office of Worker’s Compensation Programs (“OWCP”) of the Department of Labor had no record of that filing, and Fagan could provide no acknowledgment of its filing, Fagan did put on some evidence that he filed the claim. After considering the evidence, the ALJ found that Fagan had not carried his burden of proving he filed an LHWCA claim in March 1989.

Fagan provided the ALJ a copy of a form LS-203 (Employee’s Claim for Compensation) signed by Fagan and dated March 21, 1988, a date almost three months prior to Fagan’s injury. Fagan contended that the form was misdated, and was actually completed on March 21, 1989. In support of his claim of misdating, he provided his own affidavit, and that of his wife and the attorney who helped him complete the form.

Fagan’s attorney’s former secretary testified before the ALJ. She stated that in late March 1989 she accompanied Fagan and his wife to the Hale Boggs Federal Building at 500 Camp Street in New Orleans, Louisiana, to file the claim form with the OWCP. Fa-gan’s wife testified that she accompanied Fa-gan’s attorney’s secretary to the OWCP office.

In its opinion, the ALJ noted that the OWCP was not located in the Hale Boggs Building in March 1989; it had moved to 701 Loyola Avenue on May 31, 1988. The ALJ also noted that the same attorney was handling Fagan’s Social Security claim, and that neither the secretary nor Fagan’s wife would be able to tell the difference between filing an OWCP claim and a Social Security claim. All that the ALJ was able to determine was that “some time in March, 1989, someone from [Fagan’s lawyer’s office] assisted the Fagans in taking some type of documents somewhere.” From this, the ALJ found that Fagan failed to carry his burden of proving that he filed an OWCP claim by June 1989. Fagan does not appeal this factfinding.

Fagan argued in 'the alternative that he did not become aware that his injury was work-related until he received Dr. Richard Paddison’s report on July 20, 1990. This report, Fagan claimed, was the first time a doctor told him that his neurological problems were caused by the blow to the head, rather than his diabetes. Before that date, Fagan’s physicians’ diagnoses were inconclusive, or, in the case of Dr. Applebaum, stated that his problems were caused solely by diabetes. Fagan therefore contended that he did not become aware of the relationship between his injury and his employment until July 20, 1990. Accordingly, the one-year prescriptive period did not begin to run until that date. Because his LHWCA claim was filed on June 27,1991, less than a year later, it was timely filed. The ALJ agreed with Fagan that “[t]he first opinion reporting more than a speculative link between the head blow and [Fagan’s] condition was Dr. Paddison’s report stating his belief that [Fa-gan] suffered ‘accelerating head trauma.’” Therefore, the ALJ found, Fagan’s claim was not time-barred.

The Board held that the ALJ reasonably found the claim timely filed, and affirmed the ALJ’s finding. Our review of Board orders is limited to considering errors of law and ensuring that the Board adhered to its statutory standard of review, namely, whether the ALJ’s factfindings are supported by substantial evidence. See Ingalls Shipbuilding v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Williams v. Conway
N.D. California, 2022

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
111 F.3d 17, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6683, 1997 WL 169395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ceres-gulf-inc-v-director-office-of-workers-compensation-programs-ca5-1997.