 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Millican v. General Motors Corp.11/1/2000
to fit his claim within the parameters of that statute, he may still be able to avoid prescription if he can establish that his case falls under one of the refinements or exceptions developed in the jurisprudence. Johnson, Id. at p. 349. As with any prescriptive period, prescription on workers' compensation claims may be interrupted or suspended. Krieg v. Krieg Brothers Terrazzo Co., Inc., 93-1065 (La. App. 3d Cir. 09/28/94), 645 So.2d 661, writ denied, 95-0152 (La. 03/30/95), 651 So.2d 837; Latino v. Binswanger Glass Company, 532 So.2d 960 (La. App. 5th Cir. 1988).
When a workers' compensation claim has prescribed on its face, the claimant has the burden of showing that prescription has been interrupted or suspended in some manner. Causby v. Perque Floor Covering, 97-1235 (La. 01/21/98), 707 So.2d 23; Brown v. Caddo Career Center, 28,111 (La. App. 2d Cir. 02/08/96), 669 So.2d 712, writ denied, 96-1042 (La. 05/31/96), 674 So.2d 262; Smith, supra; Lynn, supra. La. C.C. art. 3467 provides that prescription runs against all persons unless they are included in some exception established by law. In accord with the purpose behind the workers' compensation act, these requirements are interpreted liberally in favor of maintaining rather than barring the action. Glascock, supra; Howard v. Trelles, 95-0227 (La. App. 1st Cir. 02/23/96), 669 So.2d 605, writ denied, 96-0712 (La. 05/03/96), 672 So.2d 690.
In the instant case, the WCJ found that none of the jurisprudential exceptions applied, but that prescription was "interrupted" based upon Millican's reliance upon the "Statement of Rights" form he received from the OWC. While we agree with the WCJ's result, we find her analysis to be flawed.
One of the jurisprudential exceptions is estoppel on the basis that the employee was "lulled into a false sense of security" by the employer/insurer and thus induced to forego the filing of his claim until the prescriptive period had expired. Landry v. Ferguson, 279 So.2d 185 (La. 1973); Wesley, supra; Blanchard v. Tulane Medical Center, 97-1111 (La. App. 5th Cir. 03/11/98), 708 So.2d 1232; Siemssen v. Manpower Temporary Services, 95-80 (La. App. 5th Cir. 05/30/95), 656 So.2d 1115; Johnson, Id. at p. 371.
In order for this exception to apply, it is not necessary that the claimant show that the employer or insurer intentionally misled him as to the nature of the benefits being paid or the time period for asserting his claim. The claimant must establish that words, action or inaction on the part of the employer/insurer induced him to withhold suit until the time for prescription had passed. Brown, supra; Lynn, supra; Wesley, supra. If the claimant prevails on this point, the employer or insurer is estopped from raising this as a defense. Brown, supra; Wesley, supra.
Turning to the facts of the instant case, General Motors is a large corporation with thousands of unionized employees in its United States factories and plants. In accordance with a written collective bargaining agreement, GM provides sickness and accident benefits to its employees who become "wholly and continuously disabled" from performing their employment duties. This same agreement further states that if the injured employee has an "occupational disability" which entitles him to workers' compensation benefits, then his sickness and accident benefits are to be reduced by the entire amount received under workers' compensation. In Louisiana, the amount that is received by an employee in sickness and accident benefits is $500 per week, which amount exceeds the maximum weekly amount that the injured worker would be entitled to under Louisiana workers' compensation law.
To process and administer claims made
Page 1 2 3 4 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|