 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Goodne v. B E & K Construction6/23/2000
a fatal heart attack. Medical experts stated that work was a contributing factor in the heart attack. Workers' compensation death benefits were awarded.
In Morris v. Reve, Inc., 95-310 (La. App. 5th Cir. 10/18/95), 662 So. 2d 525, writ denied, 95-3037 (La. 2/16/96), 667 So. 2d 1055, the worker was finishing concrete during the hottest part of the day. Working at that time of day was not usually done. The worker had a fatal heart attack. The physician stated that the worker would not have died of the heart attack but for the hot conditions.
The facts of the present case are distinguishable from those in which heart attacks or perivascular injuries have been found to be compensable under the workers' compensation provisions. Here the plaintiff had significant risk factors not connected with his work. Unlike many of the cases in which workers' compensation benefits were awarded, the plaintiff did not have the sudden onset of symptoms. Rather, he had been experiencing angina pain for approximately one year before his heart attack. Also, the plaintiff did not have his heart attack at work, but rather it occurred a couple of days after the plaintiff had taken off work for the Thanksgiving holiday. We also note that on applications for disability insurance benefits, the plaintiff himself stated that the heart attack was not work related. Further, until the filing of the disputed claim for workers' compensation benefits, the plaintiff never informed supervisory personnel at BE&K;that he claimed that the heart attack was caused by work. However, most significantly, the plaintiff's treating physician did not attribute exertion at work as a predominate cause of the heart attack. Based upon our review of the jurisprudence, we find no case in which a heart attack was found to be compensable when the medical evidence did not establish that the work stress was the predominate and major cause of the heart attack.
Based upon the record before us, we conclude that the plaintiff's heart attack was the result of natural physiological causes and was not the result of trauma or a particular effort at work. The heart attack experienced by the plaintiff is the type of illness that was intended to be excluded by the 1989 amendment to La. R.S. 23:1021(7)(e). Therefore, the WCJ did not err in finding, at the close of the plaintiff's case, that he had not carried his burden of proving entitlement to workers' compensation benefits by clear and convincing evidence and accordingly, granting the defendant's motion for involuntary dismissal.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, we affirm the decision of the WCJ, granting the motion for involuntary dismissal in favor of the defendant, BE&K;Construction, and rejecting the demands of the plaintiff, Ronald G. Gooden, Sr., for workers' compensation benefits. Costs in this court are assessed to the plaintiff.
AFFIRMED.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|