Preview:

Supreme Court of Louisiana
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 24th day of January, 2012, are as follows: NEWS RELEASE #005

PER CURIAM: 2011-C -1130 JERRY WAYNE BENOIT v. TURNER INDUSTRIES GROUP, LLC For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the court of appeal reversed insofar as it affirms the judgment of the Office Workers' Compensation awarding claimant total medical expenses the amount of $625,168.27. As to the remaining assignments error, the writ is recalled and denied. JOHNSON, J., dissents in part and assigns reasons. KNOLL, J., dissents in part and concurs in part reasons. WEIMER, J., concurs and assigns reasons. and is of in of

assigns

01/24/12

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO. 2011-C-1130 JERRY WAYNE BENOIT VERSUS TURNER INDUSTRIES GROUP, L.L.C. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION DISTRICT 03

PER CURIAM In this workers' compensation matter, we are called upon to decide whether the Office of Workers' Compensation ("OWC") erred in awarding medical expenses to claimant in the amount of $625,168.27. For the reasons that follow, we conclude the OWC erred in awarding medical expenses under the facts of this case.

UNDERLYING FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Claimant, Jerry Wayne Benoit, sought indemnity benefits and medical expenses compensation against his employer, Turner Industries Group, L.L.C. ("Turner").1 Claimant alleged he developed acute myeloid leukemia ("AML") during his twenty-seven year employment with Turner due to his exposure to chemicals, including benzene. Turner denied the claim, and claimant filed a disputed claim for compensation with the OWC. After a trial on the merits, the OWC made a factual finding that claimant's AML was related to benzene exposure during his employment at Turner.
1

Mr. Benoit died after filing the claim, and his wife was substituted in his place. For purposes of clarity, we will refer to Mr. Benoit as "claimant" throughout this opinion, although we recognize his wife is the true party in interest.

Accordingly, the OWC awarded claimant indemnity benefits, total medical expenses in the amount of $625,168.27, and attorney fees. Turner appealed. The court of appeal affirmed the OWC judgment in its entirety. Benoit v. Turner Industries Group, LLC, 10-1460 (La. App. 3 Cir. 5/4/11), 63 So. 3d 443. Upon Turner's application, we granted certiorari for the purpose of considering the correctness of the OWC award of medical expenses. Benoit v. Turner Industries Group, LLC, 11-1130 (La. 9/23/11), 70 So. 3d 809. Although Turner assigns other errors in its brief, it was not our intent to grant the application as to these issues. Accordingly, as to all assignments of error other than the assignment relating to medical expenses, we will recall and deny the writ. See Ruiz v. Oniate, 97-2412, p. 12 (La. 5/19/98), 713 So. 2d 442, 449; Sanders v. Zeagler, 96-1170, p. 6 (La. 1/14/97), 686 So. 2d 819, 823; Ledbetter v. Concord Gen. Corp., 95-0809, p. 8 (La. 1/6/96), 665 So. 2d 1166, 1171. The sole issue presented for our consideration is whether the OWC erred in awarding medical expenses to claimant under the facts of this case.

DISCUSSION At the outset, we note claimant qualified for the Medicaid program. Of the total $625,168.27 charges submitted, Medicaid paid $203,124.68. According to Turner, the remaining $422,043.59 was written off under the Medicaid program. Turner argues claimant is not entitled to recover the $203,124.68 paid by Medicaid, nor the $422,043.59 written off amount. Because Turner makes different arguments with regard to these amounts, we will address them separately.

Medical Expenses Paid by Medicaid
2

In determining the effect to be given to the $203,124.68 paid by Medicaid, the arguments of the parties focus on the language of La. R.S. 23:1212, which provides: A. Except as provided in Subsection B, payment by any person or entity, other than a direct payment by the employee, a relative or friend of the employee, or by Medicaid or other state medical assistance programs of medical expenses that are owed under this Chapter, shall extinguish the claim against the employer or insurer for those medical expenses. ... B. Payments by Medicaid or other state medical assistance programs shall not extinguish these claims and any payments by such entities shall be subject to recovery by the state against the employer or insurer. [emphasis added]

Turner relies on Paragraph A of the statute, which it interprets as extinguishing any claim for medical expenses against an employer for medical expenses which have been paid by Medicaid. However, claimant seizes on language in Paragraph B of the statute, which he maintains stands for the proposition that payments by Medicaid do not extinguish his claim for recovery. To understand the parties' arguments, some background information on the evolution of La. R.S. 23:1212 is helpful. Prior to 1990, the law prohibited an employer from taking an offset for medical expenses paid by a health care insurer. See Bryant v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 414 So. 2d 322 (La. 1982) (holding a reduction or offset for benefits paid by an insurer "constitutes an indirect employee contribution to the cost of workers' compensation and is prohibited by La.R.S. 23:1163"). Responding to pressure from the business community in 1989, the legislature enacted a new section in the workers' compensation act to permit a medical offset, if the benefits were paid by someone other than a direct payment by the employee, a relative, or friend of the employee. 1 Denis Paul Juge,
3

Louisiana Workers' Compensation,

Download 2011-C-1130 JERRY WAYNE BENOIT v. TURNER INDUSTRIES GROUP, LLC.pdf

Louisiana Law