 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Catchot v. RAMCO Construction11/14/2001
This is an appeal by a claimant from a judgment dismissing his claim for workers' compensation benefits. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Claimant, Joseph J. Catchot, Jr., was employed by RAMCO Construction ("RAMCO") in its drywall and acoustical ceiling contracting business. Mr. Catchot alleges that sometime between December 1998 and May 1999, he sustained serious injuries to his shoulders while in the course and scope of his employment, resulting in surgery on his right shoulder on June 30, 1999, to correct a torn rotator cuff. Additionally, Mr. Catchot alleges that on June 21, 1999, he sustained a serious injury to his lumbar spine while in the course and scope of his employment, which aggravated a pre-existing condition and that resulted in disc protrusions at the L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1 levels.
In August of 1999, Mr. Catchot filed a disputed claim for compensation with the Office of Workers' Compensation ("OWC"). In response, RAMCO denied that Mr. Catchot suffered any work-related injury. Following a trial on the merits held April 19, 2000, the OWC judge rendered judgment on May 19, 2000, dismissing Mr. Catchot's claim. No reasons were assigned by the OWC judge. Mr. Catchot appeals this judgment alleging the OWC erred in failing to award him compensation benefits, penalties, and attorney fees.
DISCUSSION
An employee who sustains a personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course and scope of his employment is entitled to collect workers' compensation from his employer, unless he is otherwise eliminated from benefits under the provisions of Title 23. La. R.S. 23:1031(A). "Accident" means an unexpected or unforeseen actual, identifiable, precipitous event happening suddenly or violently, with or without human fault, and directly producing at the time objective findings of an injury which is more than simply a gradual deterioration or progressive degeneration. La. R.S. 23:1021(1).
The claimant has the burden of proof to establish a work-related accident by a preponderance of the evidence. Bruno v. Harbert International Inc., 593 So.2d 357, 361 (La. 1992); Parfait v. Gulf Island Fabrication, Inc., 97-2104, p. 5 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1/6/99), 733 So.2d 11, 17. A worker's testimony alone may be sufficient to discharge this burden of proof, provided two elements are satisfied: (1) no other evidence discredits or casts serious doubt upon the worker's version of the incident, and, (2) the worker's testimony is corroborated by the circumstances following the alleged incident. Bruno v. Harbert International Inc., 593 So.2d at 361; Parfait v. Gulf Island Fabrication, Inc., 733 So.2d at 17. Corroboration of the worker's testimony may be provided by the testimony of fellow workers, spouses or friends, or by medical evidence. Bruno v. Harbert International Inc., 593 So.2d at 361.
In determining whether a worker has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that an injury-causing accident occurred in the course and scope of employment, the trier of fact is expected to focus on the issue of credibility because, absent contradictory circumstances and evidence, a claimant's testimony is accorded great weight. Bruno v. Harbert International Inc., 593 So.2d at 361; Parfait v. Gulf Island Fabrication, Inc., 733 So.2d at 17. A workers' compensation judge's determinations as to whether the claimant's testimony is credible and whether the claimant has discharged his burden of proof are factual determinations which will not be disturbed upon review in the absence of manifest error or unless clearly wrong. Id.
In the instant case, in dispute is whether the claimant suffered compensable
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Louisiana Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|