Hampton v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co.

445 So. 2d 110, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 7924
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedJanuary 16, 1984
Docket15951-CA
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 445 So. 2d 110 (Hampton v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. 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
Hampton v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co., 445 So. 2d 110, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 7924 (La. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

445 So.2d 110 (1984)

Bernard R. HAMPTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 15951-CA.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

January 16, 1984.

Pringle & Herzog by R. Perry Pringle, Shreveport, for plaintiff-appellant.

Wilkinson & Carmody by Arthur R. Carmody, Jr., Shreveport, for defendant-appellee.

Before JASPER E. JONES, FRED W. JONES, Jr. and SEXTON, JJ.

SEXTON, Judge.

Plaintiff sued under a health and hospitalization insurance policy to collect the benefits allegedly due him for the travel expense incurred in being transported from one medical facility to another. The trial *111 court denied plaintiff's claims. We reverse.

Original plaintiff in this cause was Bernard R. Hampton, of Bossier Parish, Louisiana. Mr. Hampton died during the pendency of these proceedings, and the claims of original petitioner are now urged by his wife and son, Faye Hampton and Larry Hampton. Defendant in this cause is Lincoln National Life Insurance Company (Lincoln Life).

The facts of this cause were established by stipulation prior to trial. Bernard Hampton was a 57 year old white male, who was in good health until the sudden onset of a headache and a subsequent bout of disequilibrium on April 19, 1981. When Mr. Hampton's condition did not improve for several hours, he was admitted into the emergency room of the Bossier Medical Center. Tests conducted the following day revealed that plaintiff had suffered a large right cerebellar arteriovenous malformation with subarachnoid hemorraging—a stroke.

The results of these tests of Mr. Hampton were reviewed by Dr. Warren Long of the Bossier Medical Center. Dr. Long recommended that these test results be sent to brain surgery specialist Dr. Charles Drake of London, Ontario, Canada, for his evaluation. After review of the data sent him, Dr. Drake recommended that Mr. Hampton undergo surgery. Pursuant to this recommendation, Mr. Hampton was flown to London, Ontario, Canada and hospitalized in the University Hospital in London, Ontario for the purpose of receiving surgical treatment from Dr. Drake. Dr. Drake performed a posterior craniotomy operation on Mr. Hampton, excising Mr. Hampton's arteriovenous malformation. Immediately after Mr. Hampton's return to his recovery room, it became necessary to repeat the operation. Mr. Hampton subsequently became unable to breath, and underwent a tracheotomy on June 11, 1981.

After Mr. Hampton's condition stabilized, he was flown back to Bossier Medical Center, with his tracheotomy still in place. Mr. Hampton was flown from Ontario to Bossier City by air ambulance, because of Dr. Drake's insistence that Mr. Hampton was not capable of making a commercial flight. Mr. Hampton was readmitted to the Bossier Medical Center upon his return to Louisiana, and remained at the Bossier Medical Center from June 21, 1981 through September 28, 1981. After over three months of hospitalization at Bossier Medical Center, Mr. Hampton was transferred to P & S Rehabilitation Center in Shreveport. Mr. Hampton thereafter lapsed into a coma and subsequently died on August 17, 1982.

At the time of his stroke on April 19, 1981, Mr. Hampton was covered by a group health and accident insurance policy which covered his employer, Liberia Manufacturing Company, and Mr. Hampton as an employee of Liberia. Defendant Lincoln Life has paid over $150,000 in medical expenses pursuant to this insurance coverage, including the cost of transporting Mr. Hampton from Bossier Medical Center to Ontario, Canada to undergo the surgical procedures performed by Dr. Drake.

However, Lincoln Life has refused to pay the $7,234.21 cost incurred in Mr. Hampton's return to Bossier Medical Center from London, Ontario by air ambulance.

Suit was filed on May 5, 1982, seeking the cost of the ambulatory air evacuation of Mr. Hampton from London, Ontario to Bossier Medical Center; plaintiffs further sought statutory penalties and attorney's fees for Lincoln Life's failure to reimburse petitioners for the costs associated with this air transfer.

The trial court rejected plaintiff's demands reasoning that, under the stipulated facts, the insurance policy did not provide coverage for the "return" of Mr. Hampton by air ambulance from Ontario to Louisiana. The primary issue to be resolved on this appeal is whether the insurance policy issued by Lincoln Life afforded coverage for the $7,234.21 expense incurred in transporting Mr. Hampton by air ambulance from Ontario to Louisiana. The ancillary issue to be addressed herein is whether Lincoln Life's refusal to pay that amount was arbitrary and capricious and without *112 just or reasonable grounds, so as to justify the invocation of statutory penalties and attorney's fees under LSA-R.S. 22:657.

The applicable provisions of the insurance policy at issue provide as follows:

"R. MAJOR MEDICAL BENEFITS
If an insured individual incurs eligible charges ... major medical benefits are payable.
. . . .
4. Eligible Charges are those incurred for one of the following:
. . . .
j. transportation within the United States and Canada of the [insured employee] by professional ambulance service, railroad, or regularly scheduled airline to, but not returning from, a hospital or sanitarium." (Emphasis added.)

Appellant and appellee have not directed our attention to any jurisprudence of this state which interprets the contractual phraseology in question, nor have we uncovered any. We are thus guided, in our analysis of this contractual language, by the codal rules mandating that judicial interpretations of contract endeaver to ascertain the "true intent of all the parties," and that "the intent is to be determined by the words of the contract, when these are clear and explicit and lead to no absurd consequences." LSA-C.C. 1945.

The policy language at issue, when reduced to its basic functional elements, dictates that the insured be reimbursed for medical transportation "to, but not returning from, a hospital or sanitarium." Having considered this contractual language in an effort to comprehend its underlying intent as evinced by the terms employed, we conclude that this language engenders ambiguity.

In stating that the transportation expense incurred in returning from a hospital is not reimbursible, this policy provision might be reasonably construed to exclude an insured's return from the hospital after his medical treatment has been completed. This provision could be reasonably construed to exclude an insured's return from the hospital after his period of hospitalization has been terminated. This provision could be reasonably construed to exclude an insured's return from the hospital to his own home. Conversely stated, it is not clear that this policy intended to exclude coverage for transportation expense where the patient/insured leaves a medical institution, but does not "return" home therefrom, and the patient/insured has completed neither his medical treatment nor his period of hospitalization. We think it reasonable to conclude that the instant group health and hospitalization policy intended to provide coverage for the duration of the patient/insured's period of hospitalization; and to terminate coverage when hospitalization ceased. In common sense terms, the policy arguably envisioned that the patient would "get home on his own" after his institutionalized convalescence and medical treatment ended.

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

Related

Seilham v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co.
360 F. Supp. 3d 412 (E.D. Louisiana, 2018)
Polk v. City of Mansfield
782 So. 2d 106 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2001)
Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Kiefer
984 F. Supp. 988 (E.D. Louisiana, 1997)
Shaw v. Fidelity & Cas. Ins. Co.
582 So. 2d 919 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1991)
Baugh v. Redmond
565 So. 2d 953 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1990)
US Fire Ins. v. W. Monroe Charter Service
504 So. 2d 93 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1987)
Gipson v. Yosemite Ins. Co.
494 So. 2d 1290 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1986)
Wallace v. Globe Life & Accident Insurance Co.
478 So. 2d 656 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1985)
Cartwright v. CUNA Mutual Insurance Society
476 So. 2d 915 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
445 So. 2d 110, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 7924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hampton-v-lincoln-nat-life-ins-co-lactapp-1984.