Miller v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

478 So. 2d 200, 1985 La. App. LEXIS 10141
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedNovember 7, 1985
DocketNo. 84-793
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 478 So. 2d 200 (Miller v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty 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
Miller v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 478 So. 2d 200, 1985 La. App. LEXIS 10141 (La. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

DOUCET, Judge.

This is a worker’s compensation suit instituted for Anthony Lynn Miller against the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, the worker’s compensation insurer of his former employer, Coastal Drywall. He seeks permanent total disability benefits as a result of an accident which occurred on July 20, 1982. Defendant’s appeal from a trial court judgment holding the plaintiff temporarily totally disabled and awarding benefits. The plaintiff answered the appeal seeking permanent total disability.

The evidence shows that on July 20, 1982, Miller was working on a construction site in Lake Charles. While he was moving a scaffold, a bucket of sheetrock mud, weighing approximately 50 pounds, hit him on the head. Although Miller was wearing a hard hat at the time, he received emergency room treatment at St. Patrick’s Hospital and was sent home. He returned to work the next day. On August 11, 1982, Miller was admitted to the hospital by Dr. Shamieh, complaining of headaches and dizziness. Shamieh had treated Miller for similar symptoms before the accident. However, he testified that after the accident the problem occurred more frequently and was more severe. He further stated that after the accident, the headaches were vascular in origin as opposed to being tension headaches as before the accident.

Dr. Shamieh’s neurological findings were normal. He treated Miller with medication. On or about August 16, 1982, Dr. Shamieh released Miller to return to work. Miller continued work for Coastal Drywall until the end of August when he was laid off in a general cutback. He saw Dr. Shamieh again in September when he reported only one headache since his last visit. While unemployed, he helped a friend harvest rice. In January 1983, he was employed by Lloyd Moreau. He was laid off after two weeks when the job was finished. In June and July of 1983, he was employed by Dennis Young Carpet Services doing light clean-up work.

After consulting an optometrist, Miller was referred to Dr. William Foster. Miller saw Dr. Foster on July 13, 1983, complaining of headaches at the base of the skull, dizziness and intermittent tingling in the left upper extremity. Miller was admitted into the hospital for several days. Dr. Foster found no disabling organic pathology, but was not of the opinion that Miller was malingering. His diagnosis was post-traumatic stress syndrome. Dr. Foster’s office referred the plaintiff to Dr. Edmund Camp III, a psychiatrist. He also diagnosed Miller to be suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome. He found Miller to be depressed, anxious and angry, suffering from slowed thinking, retarded speech, hy-persomnia, and a moderate to moderately-severe constriction of interests. Camp admitted Miller to the hospital on July 19, [202]*2021983. He was released on August 3, 1983. Miller was found to be suffering from pre-diabetes, post-traumatic stress syndrome, chronic depression, carbon monoxide toxicity poisoning (from smoking) resulting in headache, hormonal imbalances, traumatic arthritis and obesity. He was treated with diet, vitamins, high blood pressure medicine (although Miller did not have high blood pressure), and L-tryptophane, for hormonal imbalances. He was advised to cut down on his smoking. Dr. Camp continued to treat him with psychotherapy.

On August 10, 1983, Miller was again admitted to the hospital suffering from a severe bacterial infection, as well as continuing manifestations of post-traumatic stress syndrome. The testimonies of Dr. Camp and Mrs. Miller indicate that while in the hospital, Miller became suicidal and preoccupied with a fear of killing his wife and children. Dr. Camp treated him with anti-psychotic medication. Dr. Camp testified that he could not allow Miller to return to work because of destructive urges.

Miller’s wife, Deborah, testified that since the accident, Miller’s personality had changed. He became forgetful, was easily angered, and that they had sexual problems. She stated that before the accident, he was a happy person, enjoyed a good relationship with his children, and participated in many activities, including hunting, fishing, gardening, bowling, and cards. After the accident, he lost interest in all these activities. She stated that while he had some good days, he would slip back into depression and bad temper. This testimony was corroborated by Deborah Miller’s father, Earl James Young, and her uncle, Dennis Young.

Dr. Giles Morin, an expert witness for the defendant in the field of psychiatry, examined Miller on February 20, 1984. On the basis of that examination, he diagnosed Miller as having intermittent explosive disorder, or explosive personality which would be best alleviated by going back to work. He stated that post-traumatic stress disorder only arises after a life-threatening experience. He further stated his belief that many of Miller’s problems, including the suicidal/homicidal tendencies, were the result of over-medication. This diagnosis was supported by the plaintiff’s own testimony that he had not experienced any suicidal/homicidal tendencies prior to treatment from Dr. Camp.

Miller filed this suit on May 31, 1983. After trial, the district court held that the plaintiff was temporarily totally disabled and awarded benefits and expenses. The defendant appeals, alleging that the trial court improperly excluded medical evidence, failed to give proper weight to medical evidence rebutting plaintiff’s claims, and that the plaintiff failed to carry his burden of proof.

The plaintiff answered asking that the judgment of the trial court be modified to declare the defendant to be permanently totally disabled and to award penalties and attorney’s fees, for arbitrary and capricious failure to pay benefits.

DISABILITY

The trial judge stated in his reasons for judgment that “The evidence reflects that the defendant is suffering from some kind of traumatic neurosis that relates directly to the injury on July 20, 1982.”

The reasons for judgment further indicate that, in order to reach its finding, the trial judge rejected the testimony of Dr. Morin and accepted the testimony of Dr. Camp. This decision was based primarily on the fact that Dr. Camp, as treating physician, had more opportunity to view the petitioner more thoroughly.

At the time of trial, Dr. Camp had treated Mr. Miller over a period of she months, spending between three and four hundred hours with him. Dr. Morin saw Mr. Miller only once and spent less than an hour with him.

“Appellate courts must give weight to the conclusions reached by the trier of fact, and where there is a conflict in testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed on appeal absent clear error. Canter v. Koehring [203]*203Co., 283 So.2d 716 (La.1973); Bertrand v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, 306 So.2d 343 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1975), writ denied, 310 So.2d 641 (La.1975).” Bren Lynn Corp. v. Valliere, 434 So.2d 600 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1983).

Our review of the record causes us to conclude that the judge was not clearly wrong in finding that plaintiff carried his burden of proof.

The recent case of Walton v. Normandy Village Homes Association, Inc., 475 So.2d 320 (La.1985), repeats the evolving jurisprudence on the burden of establishing disability and its causal relation with the employment accident:

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

Related

Dean v. K-Mart Corp.
720 So. 2d 349 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1998)
Williams v. Regional Transit Authority
546 So. 2d 150 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
478 So. 2d 200, 1985 La. App. LEXIS 10141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-united-states-fidelity-guaranty-co-lactapp-1985.