Todd Mouton v. Lafayette Parish Sheriff's Office

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: May 7, 2014
• Docket: WCA-0013-1411
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

13-1411

TODD MOUTON

VERSUS

LAFAYETTE PARISH SHERIFF’S OFFICE

********** APPEAL FROM THE OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION - # 4 PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. 13-03179 ADAM C. JOHNSON, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION JUDGE **********

ELIZABETH A. PICKETT JUDGE

**********

Court composed of Elizabeth A. Pickett, Shannon J. Gremillion, and Phyllis M. Keaty, Judges.

MOTION TO REMAND GRANTED.

Mark L. Riley Glenn Armentor Corp. 300 Stewart St. Lafayette, LA 70501 (337) 233-1471 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT: Todd Mouton

James D. Hollier Philip Henry Boudreaux, Jr. NeunerPate P. O. Drawer 52828 Lafayette, LA 70505-2828 (337) 237-7000 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE: Lafayette Parish Sheriff’s Office PICKETT, Judge.

Todd Mouton appeals the judgment of the workers’ compensation judge

(WCJ) upholding the determination of the Medical Director denying treatment.

The Lafayette Parish Sheriff’s Office (LPSO) has filed a Motion to Remand.

The accident at issue occurred in 2001 when Mouton was employed by the

LPSO. LPSO sought a determination from the Medical Director seeking to

terminate weekly massage therapy for Lt. Mouton. Lt. Mouton contested the

denial of treatment. When the Medical Director denied treatment, Lt. Mouton filed

a Disputed Claim for Compensation asking that the Medical Director be overruled.

Whether the procedure requiring review by the Medical Director should

have been employed in this case is an open question in light of this court’s en banc

decision in Romero v. Garan’s, Inc., 13-482 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/26/13), ___ So.3d

___, and the pending decision of the Supreme Court in Cook v. Family Care

Services, Inc., 13-108 (La.App. 3 Cir. 8/28/13), 121 So.3d 1274, writ granted, 13-

2326 (La. 1/17/14), ___ So.3d ___ (argued before the Supreme Court on March 25,

2014). This case however, is complicated by an additional fact. Both parties in

their briefs admit that a stipulation exists whereby the new guidelines and

procedure would be utilized even though the injury occurred many years before the

amendment of the statute. This stipulation is not included in the record before us

and was not presented to the WCJ. LPSO filed their Motion to Remand to

supplement the record with this agreement.

We hereby grant the Motion to Remand. On remand, the WCJ is instructed

to consider the stipulation entered into between the parties, as well as the potential

effect of the evolving jurisprudence.