 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hodges v. Bossier Medical Center Healthcare6/21/2000
distinguishable from the situation presented in the instant case. In O'Regan, supra, the employee's disease was presumed to be non-occupational under the Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act and thus her claim was not covered under its provisions. Since the act itself presumed that her claim was not covered, its exclusivity provision was not applicable to the employee and she could sue her employer in tort. In so deciding, the supreme court noted that the act "was designed to serve as a substitute for an employee's right to sue in tort and to provide no-fault recovery. It was not intended to create a class of employees who had neither a right to recovery under the Act nor a right to a claim in tort."
Furthermore, as to FARA, the administrator of BMC's workers' compensation claims, we look to our recent decision in Hale v. F.A. Richard & Associates, Inc., 32,907 (La. App. 2d Cir. 4/5/00), ___ So. 2d ___, in which we held that there is no action in tort against a third-party administrator such as FARA for refusal to pay for medical treatment. See also Foster v. F.A. Richard & Associates, Inc., supra.
Based on the above, we find that the trial court erred in denying the defendants' exceptions of no cause of action. The plaintiff has no tort action under the facts of this case. Accordingly, we reverse.
CONCLUSION
The trial court judgments denying the defendants' exceptions of no cause of action are reversed. The writs are granted and made peremptory. Costs are assessed against the plaintiff.
REVERSED.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|