 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Ward v. McDermott12/31/2003
In this workers' compensation action, the workers' compensation judge ("WO") rendered judgment granting summary judgment in favor of defendant, J. Ray McDermott, granting McDermott's exception raising the objection of prescription; granting McDermott's exception raising the objection of res judicata; and dismissing, with prejudice, the workers' compensation claim of William Ward. Mr. Ward appeals from said judgment. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Mr. Ward was employed by McDermott as a welders helper on September 6, 2000. According to Mr. Ward, he was sandblasting when sand got into his eyes. Mr. Ward was attended to by a McDermott medic on the scene. Thereafter, on September 22, 2000, Mr. Ward was examined by Dr. L. Arnold Cloutier, Jr., who advised Mr. Ward that he could return to work and would not require additional medical care. Mr. Ward subsequently filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits in District 5. A trial on the merits was scheduled for May 13, 2002. When Mr. Ward failed to appear for trial, the WCJ dismissed the claim, without prejudice, and afforded Mr. Ward thirty days to reinstate his claim. Mr. Ward neither reinstated his original claim in District 5, nor appealed the WCJ's May 16, 2002 judgment dismissing his claim. Rather, on September 18, 2002, Mr. Ward filed a new claim for benefits in District 9 based on the same incident.
In response to Mr. Ward's September 18, 2002 claim, McDermott filed a motion for summary judgment, an exception raising the objection of prescription, and an exception raising the objection of res judicata. A hearing on these matters was scheduled for December 16, 2002, and Mr. Ward was properly notified of same. According to the record, the parties participated in a telephone status conference on December 3, 2002, at which time a telephone pre-trial conference was scheduled for January 9, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. Thereafter, on December 6, 2002, McDermott filed a motion to continue the December 16, 2002 hearing. On December 9, 2002, the WCJ signed an order indicating that the hearing would be continued to "9th day of January, 2002 at 9:00 a.m." Although the date of the hearing was obviously intended to be reflected as January 9, 2003, a copy of the order containing the date of January 9, 2002, was mailed to Mr. Ward via certified mail, return receipt requested. Mr. Ward received same on December 10, 2002.
On January 9, 2003, McDermott's motions were called for hearing before the WCJ. Mr. Ward failed to appear for the hearing, and the matter proceeded in his absence. Counsel for McDermott presented argument to the WCJ and introduced various exhibits into evidence. The WCJ took the matter under advisement and, on January 15, 2003, signed a judgment in McDermott's favor granting McDermott's motion for summary judgment, maintaining McDermott's exceptions raising the objections of prescription and res judicata, and dismissing Mr. Ward's claim with prejudice.
Mr. Ward has appealed from this judgment, assigning error to the WCJ's dismissal of his claim. Mr. Ward raises the issue of whether he received proper notice of the January 9, 2003 hearing.
DISCUSSION
The prescriptive period for workers' compensation claims is set forth in La. R.S. 23:1209 A as follows:
A. In case of personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, all claims for payments shall be forever barred unless within one year after the accident or death the parties have agreed upo
Page 1 2 3 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
|