 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Landreneau v. St. Landry Fire Dist.2/6/2002
AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff James Landreneau is employed as Assistant Chief for the St. Landry Fire District and has been so employed since 1973. He appeals the workers' compensation judge's judgment on the Fire District's motion for summary judgment, which was granted on the grounds that La.R.S. 33:2011 requires the presence of disabling cancer to invoke the presumption of medical causation and that Mr. Landreneau's cancer was not disabling.
For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
I. ISSUES
We shall consider whether the workers' compensation judge erred in interpreting the applicability of La.R.S. 33:2011 so as to require the presence of disabling cancer before the claimant is entitled to the presumption of medical causation contained therein.
II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
James Buford Landreneau was hired by the St. Landry Fire District No. 3 (hereinafter "Fire District") in 1973 and remains employed as Assistant Chief. He suffers from bladder cancer-a cancer that has allegedly developed since his employment's commencement. Mr. Landreneau believes that the bladder cancer involved is a type consistent with regular, consistent exposure to heat, smoke, or radiation as contemplated by La.R.S. 33:2011.
Some of the medical expenses associated with the treatment of the recurrent bladder cancer have been partially paid by Mr. Landreneau's private healthcare insurer. However, the Louisiana Workers' Compensation Corporation (hereinafter "LWCC"), the workers' compensation carrier for the Fire District, has refused to pay any medical expenses.
LWCC's refusal prompted Mr. Landreneau to file this claim. In response, the Fire District filed a motion for summary judgment which was accompanied by the depositions of Mr. Landreneau and Dr. Frank Bacque, Mr. Landreneau's treating urologist. A hearing was held June 22, 2001 and judgment was rendered, granting the motion, on June 25, 2001. In his Reasons for Judgment, the workers' compensation judge stated that the language of La.R.S. 33:2011 is clear in that its application requires the presence of disabling cancer. In the opinion of the judge below, the testimony of both Mr. Landreneau and Dr. Bacque established that the claimant's cancer was not disabling, therefore rendering La.R.S. 33:2011 inapplicable.
III. LAW AND DISCUSSION
"Appellate courts review summary judgments de novo under the same criteria that govern the district court's consideration of whether summary judgment is appropriate." Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd., 93-1480, p. 2 (La. 4/11/94); 634 So.2d 1180, 1183; Leger v. La. Med. Mut. Ins. Co., 98-1098, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/31/99); 732 So.2d 654, 657, writ denied, 99-1253 (La. 6/18/99); 745 So.2d 30. Stated differently, this court "asks the same questions as does the trial court in determining whether summary judgment is appropriate: whether there is any genuine issue of material fact, and whether the mover-appellant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Labbe v. Chem. Waste Management, Inc., 00-1772, pp. 4-5 (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/2/01); 786 So.2d 868, 872, writ denied, 2001-1602 (La. 9/14/01); 796 So.2d 685 (quoting Smith v. Our Lady of the Lake Hosp., Inc., 93- 2512, p. 26 (La. 7/5/94); 639 So.2d 730, 750).
Louisiana Revised Statutes 33:2011 reads as follows:
A. Because of exposure to heat, smoke, and fumes or carcinogenic, poisonous, toxic, or chemical substances, when a firefighter in the classified service who has completed ten or more years of service is unable to perform his regular duties in the fire service in this state by reason of a disabling cancer, such cancer shall be classified as an
Page 1 2 3 Louisiana Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|