Industrial Babbitt Bearings v. Lessard

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Industrial Babbitt Bearings v. Lessard

879 So. 2d 172, 2003 La.App. 1 Cir. 0904, 2004 La. App. LEXIS 745, 2004 WL 691733

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedApril 2, 2004

DocketNo. 2003 CA 0904

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 879 So. 2d 172 (Industrial Babbitt Bearings v. Lessard) 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

Industrial Babbitt Bearings v. Lessard, 879 So. 2d 172, 2003 La.App. 1 Cir. 0904, 2004 La. App. LEXIS 745, 2004 WL 691733 (La. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

DOWNING, J.

In this workers’ compensation dispute, the claimant, Gary P. Lessard, alleged that he injured his lower back while in the scope of his employment as a welder for the Industrial Babbitt Bearings Company. The employer filed a disputed claim form, alleging Lessard was in violation of La. R.S. 23:1208 by willfully making false statements in order to obtain benefits. The workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) rendered judgment in favor of Lessard and the employer appealed. The only issue on appeal is whether the WCJ erred in finding that Lessard did not violate La. R.S. 23:1208. Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, a fact finder’s choice between them can never be manifestly erroneous. Stobart v. State, Through Dept. of Transp. And Dev., 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993). After a thorough review of the record and exhibits, we conclude that the record does not demonstrate that the fact finder’s decision was manifestly erroneous. Thus, in accordance with Uniform Court of Appeal Rules 2-16.2A(8), the decision of the WCJ is affirmed at the employer/appellant’s costs.

AFFIRMED.

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

DOWNING, J.

In this workers’ compensation dispute, the claimant, Gary P. Lessard, alleged that he injured his lower back while in the scope of his employment as a welder for the Industrial Babbitt Bearings Company. The employer filed a disputed claim form, alleging Lessard was in violation of La. R.S. 23:1208 by willfully making false statements in order to obtain benefits. The workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) rendered judgment in favor of Lessard and the employer appealed. The only issue on appeal is whether the WCJ erred in finding that Lessard did not violate La. R.S. 23:1208. Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, a fact finder’s choice between them can never be manifestly erroneous. Stobart v. State, Through Dept. of Transp. And Dev., 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993). After a thorough review of the record and exhibits, we conclude that the record does not demonstrate that the fact finder’s decision was manifestly erroneous. Thus, in accordance with Uniform Court of Appeal Rules 2-16.2A(8), the decision of the WCJ is affirmed at the employer/appellant’s costs.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

879 So. 2d 172, 2003 La.App. 1 Cir. 0904, 2004 La. App. LEXIS 745, 2004 WL 691733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/industrial-babbitt-bearings-v-lessard-lactapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack