Fagan v. Delta Steel & Construction Co.

449 So. 2d 1143, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 8579
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 11, 1984
DocketNo. 83-600
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 449 So. 2d 1143 (Fagan v. Delta Steel & Construction Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fagan v. Delta Steel & Construction Co., 449 So. 2d 1143, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 8579 (La. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

STOKER, Judge.

Plaintiff, Randy Fagan, appeals from a judgment of the trial court dismissing his claim for workers’ compensation benefits from his employer, Delta Steel & Construe[1144]*1144tion Company (Delta Steel), and its workers’ compensation insurer, Aetna Life & Casualty Company (Aetna). On appeal Fa-gan seeks benefits for total and permanent disability, medical expenses, and penalties and attorney’s fees. For reasons set out below, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and award benefits for total and permanent disability and medical expenses, but we deny plaintiffs claim for penalties and attorney’s fees.

ISSUES

Defendants agree that plaintiff is disabled but contend that he became disabled in a prior employment. Plaintiff agrees that he was hurt in prior employment but contends that he became disabled subsequently in the employ of Delta Steel. The issue in this case is whether an accident (as the term is construed within the context of our workers’ compensation law) occurred while plaintiff was employed by Delta Steel and which aggravated plaintiffs condition so as to disable him.

FACTS

The dismissal of Mr. Fagan’s claim against Delta Steel was based on a finding of the trial court that his disability resulted solely from an accident which occurred on January 9, 1981, while he was employed by J.A. Jones Construction Company. Mr. Fa-gan suffered injuries to his head and back on that date when he was struck by a 300-pound gate. He was hospitalized from January 13 to January 30, 1981, and was ultimately released to return to work on March 1 of that same year. He did not in fact return to work for J.A. Jones at that time because he was laid off due to a lack of work. Even though Mr. Fagan had been released to return to work, he continued to take painkillers and muscle relaxers as prescribed.

Mr. Fagan remained unemployed until he went to work for Delta Steel on August 21, 1981. He testified that he had continued to suffer low back pain which increased after he returned to work. He also testified that he began having what he described as a catch in his neck. On October 28, 1981, while reaching for a brick in a bucket of water, Mr. Fagan experienced pain in his right hand and arm. He reported this occurrence to his boss, Mr. Charles Stanford, who, as a matter of company policy, gave him a letter of introduction authorizing medical treatment. The letter was not directed to any particular doctor.

Apparently Mr. Fagan did not seek treatment for the injury of October 28, 1981 until November 10, at which time he saw a neurologist in Houston, Texas. Mr. Fagan testified that he continued to take the medication available to him from his January injury before seeking further help. Extensive tests were conducted in Houston and it was determined that Mr. Fagan had some nerve root irritation. From November 18 to December 9, Mr. Fagan was treated through outpatient therapy as recommended, and further hospitalization for diagnosis and treatment has been recommended.

As a result of Aetna’s refusal to pay benefits or medical expenses on behalf of Delta Steel, Mr. Fagan filed suit.

SOURCE OF DISABILITY

The trial court found that plaintiff was suffering from a debilitating condition, but found that the condition resulted solely from the accident which occurred January 9, 1981, when Mr. Fagan was working for J.A. Jones. We agree with the finding of disability, but find that Mr. Fagan’s condition was aggravated by his employment with Delta Steel. Thus, he is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits from Aet-na as Delta Steel’s insurer. In their brief on appeal, defendants do not argue that Mr. Fagan is not disabled, but urge only that the trial court was correct in determining that the disability resulted from the January accident.

At trial, Mr. Fagan testified that his lower back pain from the January accident began to increase when he went to work for Delta Steel and he also began having neck pain. The medical reports and deposi[1145]*1145tions in evidence corroborate this testimony. The reports of Dr. Passman, who treated Mr. Fagan after his January accident, show continuing low back pain, and the report of Dr. Davidson dated October 19,1981, shows that he was complaining of the neck problem after his employment with Delta Steel.

We find that there is sufficient evidence in the record proving that an accident occurred on October 28, 1981. At least there was an event which must be considered as an accident under the broadened interpretation which has been jurisprudentially given to the term accident within the context of the Workers’ Compensation law of this State. See Malone and Johnson, Louisiana Law Treatise, Workers’ Compensation (Vol. 13), Sections 214 and 215. In written reasons for judgment the trial court stated:

“Plaintiff seeks Workmen’s Compensation benefits on the basis of an alleged work related injury on October 28, 1981. “Although the Court appreciates the fact that plaintiff is suffering from a debilitating condition, even under the most liberal application of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, he has simply failed to prove, by a preponderance (sic) of the evidence, that he is disabled from a work related injury on or about October 28, 1981.
“The Court is lead to the abiding conclusion that plaintiff’s condition is attributable to the accident he incurred on January 9, 1981, while employed with J.A. Jones Construction Company, which is not a party to this suit.
“Therefore, plaintiff’s demands are rejected at his costs.”

It is apparently conceded that what happened to plaintiff on October 28, 1981 was causally related to the accident which occurred on January 9, 1981. As held by our Supreme Court in Ferguson v. HDE, Inc., 270 So.2d 867 (La.1972) we do not focus on accident cause but rather on accident result. It appears to us that the trial court focused on the cause, rather than the result.

Mr. Fagan’s testimony is that while reaching for a brick he suffered a sharp pain in his right hand which radiated up into his arm and neck. He immediately reported this event to his supervisor, Mr. Stanford, who gave him a letter authorizing medical treatment. Mr. Stanford and another company employee remember the event, but apparently believed that the consequences were not serious. Both testified that Mr. Fagan could straighten out his hand, although he claimed to be unable to do so.

The uncontradicted testimony of the plaintiff as to the occurrence of an accident should be accepted as true. West v. Bayou Vista Manor, Inc., 371 So.2d 1146 (La.1979). Here the only contradictory evidence as to Mr. Fagan’s accident concerns whether or not he could straighten out his hand. There is no apparent reason to believe that Mr. Fagan lacks credibility. He immediately reported the accident and was seen by a co-worker to be holding his hand by the wrist.

We also note that when injury is the result of the performance of usual and customary duties, an accident in terms of workers’ compensation has occurred. Ferguson v. HDE, Inc., supra, and Bertrand v. Coal Operators Cas. Co., 253 La. 1115, 221 So.2d 816 (La.1969).

Defendants point out that Mr. Fa-gan’s present problems are expectable complications of his January injury. Even if that be the case, Mr. Fagan is still entitled to benefits.

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

Related

Cloud v. CAJUN CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERS
517 So. 2d 1010 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1987)
Ashy Enterprises, Inc. v. Matte
497 So. 2d 1048 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1986)
Jolibois v. Hartford Acc. & Ind. Co.
486 So. 2d 283 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
449 So. 2d 1143, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 8579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fagan-v-delta-steel-construction-co-lactapp-1984.