 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Arwood v. J.P. & Sons2/29/2000
AFFIRMED
This appeal by the claimant in this workers' compensation case raises the issue of whether his second claim was properly dismissed pursuant to an exception of res judicata. For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm.
James Arwood injured his back in the course and scope of his employment in April of 1993 when he lifted a manhole cover. As a result of his injury, he began treatment with an orthopaedist and underwent two surgeries. Although Arwood received benefits for these physical injuries, he subsequently claimed that a mental injury also resulted from the accident. Specifically, he maintained that he was undergoing psychotherapy for depression and chronic pain as a result of the back injury and he made a claim for those injuries. Arwood was referred to Dr. Gerald Murphy for treatment of his mental condition. The employer initially paid Dr. Murphy's bills, but stopped payments when it was discovered that Dr. Murphy had a Ph.D. in social work. Arwood did not dispute the withdrawal of the authorization to pay Dr. Murphy, but claimed that the bills up to the date of the withdrawal should be paid.
The matter subsequently went to trial on the issue of claimant's mental condition. After considering the evidence presented, the workers' compensation judge, on March 18, 1998, rendered judgment in favor of the defendants and against the claimant. The judge found that "claimant forfeited any and all benefits to which he may have been entitled by violating LSA-R.S. 23:1208," and further found that "claimant failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that his mental state was, more probably than not, causally related to the alleged injury." From this judgment, Mr. Arwood appealed.
On March 10, 1999, this court affirmed the decision of the workers' compensation judge. In the opinion, a panel of this court expressed its agreement with the determination of the trial judge that Mr. Arwood did not meet his burden of proof that his psychological problems were causally related to his accident. This court stated that, "It is clear from the record that Mr. Arwood's emotional and psychological problems are long term, and did not develop as a result of the accident in which he injured his back." Based on this determination, the panel pretermitted discussion of whether the trial judge erred in finding that claimant forfeited any and all benefits to which he may have been entitled by violating LSA-R.S. 23:1208. See Arwood v. J. P. & Sons, Inc. & L.W.C.C., 98-1102 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/10/99).
Mr. Arwood subsequently filed a request for rehearing, complaining that this court erroneously failed to address his assignment of error relating to the judge's finding that he violated LSA-R.S. 23:1208. This court refused Arwood's application for rehearing. He then filed a writ application with the Louisiana Supreme Court which was also denied.
In the meantime, based upon the trial judge's March 18, 1998 judgment, the payment of workers' compensation benefits was terminated on or about March 30, 1998. Thereafter, in March of 1999, Mr. Arwood filed a second claim for compensation with the Office of Workers' Compensation, disputing the termination of benefits and asserting his entitlement to additional benefits. In response to this claim, the defendants filed an exception of res judicata, pointing to the finality of the judgment rendered in Arwood's first claim. Following a hearing, the judge granted the defendants' exception of res judicata. It is from this judgment that Mr. Arwood now appeals.
In his appellate brief, Mr. Arwood contends that the doctrine of res judicata should not apply because the same relief was neither sought nor liti
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.
|
|