Home/Supreme Court of Louisiana/Chelette v. Riverwood International USA, Inc.

Chelette v. Riverwood International USA, Inc.

858 So. 2d 412, 2003 La. LEXIS 2838, 2003 WL 22364445
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedOctober 17, 2003
Docket2003-C-1483
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 858 So. 2d 412 (Chelette v. Riverwood International USA, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chelette v. Riverwood International USA, Inc., 858 So. 2d 412, 2003 La. LEXIS 2838, 2003 WL 22364445 (La. 2003).

Opinion

858 So.2d 412 (2003)

Gwendolyn CHELETTE
v.
RIVERWOOD INTERNATIONAL USA, INC.

No. 2003-C-1483.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 17, 2003.

*413 PER CURIAM.

We granted certiorari in part to address one issue raised by the defendant, Riverwood International USA, Inc., in this workers' compensation case: whether the court of appeal erred in affirming an award of a penalty pursuant to LSA-R.S. 1201(F) when the employer had merely reduced supplemental earnings benefits (SEB) as contrasted with failing to make timely payment of benefits. In all other respects, the writ is denied.

The holding in Williams v. Rush Masonry, Inc., 98-2271 (La.6/29/99), 737 So.2d 41, 45, clarified the differences between LSA-R.S. 23:1201 and LSA-R.S. 23:1201.2. In instances where the employer fails to commence payment of benefits, penalties and attorney fees are authorized under LSA-R.S. 23:1201(F), unless the claim is reasonably controverted. However, when the case involves discontinuation of benefits rather than failure to provide benefits, LSA-R.S. 23:1201.2, not LSA-R.S. 23:1201(F), applies. Id.; see also, J.E. Merit Constructors, Inc. v. Hickman, XXXX-XXXX, p. 5 n. 6 (La.1/17/01), 776 So.2d 435, 437 n. 6. The sanction of penalties and attorney fees imposed by LSA-R.S. 23:1201 is not directed at the vocational rehabilitation obligation of LSA-R.S. 23:1226.'[1]See Fontenot v. Reddell Vidrine Water District, 02-0439, p. 2, dissent, (La. 1/14/03), 836 So.2d 14, 29.

We limit our grant of this writ to correction of the penalty issue and do not reach the other issue.

Accordingly, we reverse the award of a penalty made in favor of claimant Gwendolyn Chelette, to conform with the law.

WRIT GRANTED IN PART TO REVERSE AWARD OF PENALTY; OTHERWISE DENIED.

JOHNSON, J., would deny the writ.

NOTES

[1] R.S. 23:1226(A) provides that when an employee has suffered a compensable injury which precludes him from earning wages "equal to wages earned" before this injury, he is entitled to "prompt rehabilitation services."

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

Related

Lewis v. TEMPLE INLAND
80 So. 3d 52 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2011)
Williams v. A-Jax Lumber Co.
930 So. 2d 300 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006)
Broussard v. Lafayette Parish School Bd.
926 So. 2d 713 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006)
Hutchison v. Aldworth Co.
888 So. 2d 1052 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2004)
Maynard v. Grey Wolf Drilling
885 So. 2d 1277 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2004)
Boone v. Mid-State Marketing
867 So. 2d 91 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2004)
Black v. Lofland Co.
869 So. 2d 264 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
858 So. 2d 412, 2003 La. LEXIS 2838, 2003 WL 22364445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chelette-v-riverwood-international-usa-inc-la-2003.