Baton Rouge Injury Lawyer Blog

On February 10th, an East Baton Rouge Parish man filed a lawsuit against several of his previous employers in the 23rd Judicial District Court claiming that he was exposed to unreasonable noise levels at work. Robert T. Firmin sued Exxon Mobil, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, BASF Corporation, Honeywell International, Star Enterprise, PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer, Hexion Specialty Chemicals, Marathon Petroleum Company, and each former employer's insurance company over his alleged permanent hearing loss.

According to the lawsuit, Firmin claims he suffers from high-range hearing loss after being exposed to repeated and prolonged occupational noise for years. Firmin accused his former employers of battery for failing to notify him of the dangers associated with the noise. He also accused the defendants of negligence for exposing him to unreasonable levels of noise, failing to provide him with proper safety protections and training, failing to provide medical monitoring, failing to keep the noise at a safe level, and failing to alert him to the risks associated with prolonged exposure to loud occupational noises. Firmin asked the court to award him up to $75,000 in damages for disability, medical expenses, suffering, pain, and loss of enjoyment of life.

These days, injuries sustained while at work are all too common. Unfortunately, it can be difficult to navigate the laws put into place to protect workers in Louisiana. Whether an injury takes place on land, at sea, or adjacent to navigable waters will have an effect on which law applies to an employee injury. For most workers who are hurt while working on land in Louisiana, the Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act will generally provide the only avenue for recovery. Workers' compensation benefits are paid to an employee hurt while at work regardless of who caused the injury.

There are exceptions to Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act remedies, however. An employee hurt at work may sue an at-fault third-party for damages beyond those available under traditional workers' compensation laws. Also, the intentional act exception to Louisiana's workers' compensation laws allows an employee to sue an employer for negligence if the worker can demonstrate the employer either consciously desired the physical result or knew it was reasonably certain to occur as a direct result of the employer's conduct. If you were hurt on the job, it is a good idea to contact an experienced workers' compensation attorney to assist you in determining your rights.

Continue reading "East Baton Rouge Parish Man Sues Former Employers Over Permanent Hearing Loss" »

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals of Louisiana held a worker who tested positive for both marijuana and Xanax following a 2008 workplace injury was entitled to receive workers' compensation benefits.

Deloris Stenson was employed as a waitress at Pat's of Henderson Seafood when she allegedly tripped over a box of potatoes left in the walkway of a food preparation area. Stenson immediately went to the emergency room at a local hospital for her injuries. While being treated, she was also tested for drugs and alcohol in accordance with restaurant policy. After Stenson tested positive for marijuana and Xanax, her employer's insurer denied all workers' compensation benefits except for the costs associated with her emergency room visit.

Because Stenson had a prescription for Xanax and admitted to taking the drug for a back problem on the day of the accident, a workers' compensation judge determined intoxication was not a cause of her accident. The judge ordered the restaurant to pay Stenson temporary total disability benefits and medical benefits. Following the workers' compensation judge's ruling, her employer appealed to Louisiana's Third Circuit.

On appeal, the restaurant argued a valid drug prescription did not overcome the presumption in Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:1081 that Stenson was intoxicated at the time of her accident. Her employer also argued that the workers' compensation judge should not have taken the prescription into account when determining whether or not Stenson was intoxicated.

Louisiana's Third Circuit Court of Appeals, however, agreed with the workers' compensation judge, reasoning that although the restaurant met its burden of proof regarding its employee's alleged intoxication with her drug test results, the burden then shifted to Stenson. Once the burden shifted, it was up to Stenson to prove her drug use was not a contributing case of her accident. The Appellate Court also found that although Stenson admitted to smoking marijuana four days prior to the accident, there was no reason to believe it was manifestly erroneous for the workers' compensation judge to find Stenson overcame the intoxication presumption. Because no one offered testimony stating that Stenson appeared intoxicated on the day of the accident, the Appeals Court upheld the workers' compensation judge's ruling.

When an employee is hurt at work in Louisiana, workers' compensation laws generally afford the only avenue for recovery. A worker may be temporarily disabled, permanently partially disabled, or permanently totally disabled as a result of a workplace injury. The Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act provides for a variety of benefits based on the worker's gross earnings at the time the disability began. Benefits should continue until an employee is medically released by a physician to return to work, but in some cases a workers' compensation insurance company may be willing to settle a case for a single lump-sum payment. If you were injured at work, a qualified workers' compensation attorney can help you determine what benefits you may qualify for.

Continue reading "Louisiana's Third Circuit Rules Lake Charles Server Who Tested Positive for Drugs May Receive Workers' Compensation Benefits" »

In October, an industrial worker filed suit against his employer and another party in Jefferson Parish District Court for an injury which allegedly occurred after his employer failed to heed his protests regarding the safety of a work procedure. In his lawsuit, Tyrone Wilson claims he was injured on October 10, 2010 while working for T.T. Coatings Inc. on a petroleum chemical barge. Wilson claims he was instructed to pull frozen test rods out of the open end of a metal shaft assembly with pliers while another employee heated the rods from the opposite end. He also stated after he protested the procedure to his employer he was threatened with termination if he did not continue. While the rod was being heated, it purportedly exploded in Wilson's direction and injured him.

Wilson has accused TT Coatings of committing an intentional tort by ordering him to engage in a dangerous activity despite that his employer knew he was likely to be harmed. He also accused Kirby Inland Marine Transportation Co. of negligence. Wilson alleges the Kirby Corporation required TT Coatings employees to engage in an inherently dangerous work activity, failed to maintain the company's equipment, placed workers in harm's way in an attempt to save money, and demanded workers use an unsafe method to accomplish their task.

On January 11th, the case was removed to New Orleans federal court. In his complaint, Wilson asked the court to award him compensation for medical expenses, physical and mental pain and suffering, lost of wages, loss of enjoyment of life, permanent disability, court costs, and interest.

Unfortunately, workplace accidents and injuries occur all too often. Navigating the laws designed to protect employees can be complicated. In Louisiana, workers can be killed or injured while working on land, on the open seas, or adjacent to navigable waters. Where an injury occurs will have an effect on an employee's right to recovery. The Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act applies to most injuries which occur on land. Meanwhile, the Jones Act protects employees injured at sea and the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act applies to worker injuries which occur adjacent to navigable waters.

The Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act provides monetary relief to employees who are injured on the job regardless of fault. The same is true for the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Workers' compensation laws generally provide an employee with the only remedy available from an employer for workplace injuries. Exceptions do exist, however. Louisiana's intentional act exception allows a worker to sue his or her employer for negligence if the employee can show the employer either consciously desired the physical result or knew it was fairly certain to happen as a result of the employer's conduct. Additionally, a worker injured on the job may sue an at-fault third-party for damages beyond those available under traditional workers' compensation laws. An experienced workers' compensation attorney can assist you in navigating the legal process.

Continue reading "Lawsuit Against Employer for Ignoring Worker Safety Concerns Removed to New Orleans Federal Court" »

On December 30, 2011, the spouse of a manufacturing worker killed after a steel ladle unexpectedly erupted and discharged melted steel on him filed suit in New Orleans federal court against his employer and the manufacturer of the steel ladle. Samuel N. Moyer received third degree burns when the ladle purportedly malfunctioned on February 1, 2011 while he was working as a furnace second helper at ArcelorMittal Laplace steel manufacturing mill. He died as a result of his injuries two days later.

Moyer's wife filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Signal Metal Industries Inc., Danieli Corp., North American Refractories Co., Siemens Vai Services, and Black Diamond Capital Management seeking compensation for conscious physical suffering and pain, mental suffering and pain, medical and funeral expenses, court costs, and other damages such as loss of support and grief. She has alleged the steel ladle itself as well as a transfer car, nest block assembly, and stir plugs were unduly hazardous in design, composition, and manufacture. She also claims the defendants failed to warn Moyer of the hazards associated with the equipment and alleges the equipment failed to conform to the manufacturer's express warranty.

Each year, literally thousands of deaths result from tragic events such as motor vehicle and workplace accidents. The death of someone close to you is always overwhelming, but it can be particularly devastating when the death resulted from a preventable accident. When a wrongful death occurs at a workplace, a death beneficiary may sue an at-fault third-party for damages beyond those available under traditional workers' compensation laws.

In most instances of wrongful death, certain family members, referred to as death beneficiaries, will have a claim for damages against the at-fault party. A death beneficiary is generally the spouse of the person who died, but may also be the individual's child, a parent, or even a sibling or grandparent under certain circumstances. In Louisiana, the death beneficiary of an accident victim may bring both a wrongful death claim and a survival claim. A beneficiary may bring a wrongful death claim against the at-fault party for their own loss of financial support and a loss of love and affection which resulted from the death. Additionally, a beneficiary may bring a survival action claim to recover for the decedent's conscious suffering and pain, lost wages, and any medical expenses which may have occurred prior to the wrongful death.

Continue reading "Wrongful Death Case Filed in New Orleans After Man Burned With Molten Steel" »

The Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently stated the parents of a man killed while working at the St. Landry Parish Sanitary Landfill failed to prove the intentional act exception to worker's compensation immunity applied to their son's accident. 22-year-old Martel Smith was crushed to death on April 22, 2008 while working at the 200 acre landfill. On the day of his death, Smith was working alone using a Mack truck with a tilting bed to dump canisters. The tilting truck bed was moved by a hoist system operated by spring loaded controls which required constant pressure and were located inside the truck's cab. Although the landfill was closed to the public, 14 other employees were also working on the premises on the day of Smith's death. After a co-worker found Smith crushed between the truck's frame and the hoist, a number of co-workers extricated him and moved his body away from the truck. Unfortunately, all efforts to revive him failed.

There was no evidence the truck had malfunctioned and each of Smith's co-workers testified at trial they were not present during his accident. Many of his fellow employees also stated it was likely impossible for Smith to operate the hoist's controls from the location where his body was found. An expert hired by Smith's parents testified a third party must have been involved in the accident due to the spring loaded nature of the hoist controls.

Smith's parents alleged an unnamed co-worker must have killed him. According to his parents, Smith was the victim of an intentional act which nullified the exclusive remedy available through Louisiana workers' compensation laws. Because his parents lacked further evidence to support their claim, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Smith's employer.

Generally, when a person is injured on the job while working on land, workers' compensation laws provide the only remedy. Exceptions to state workers' compensation laws exist, however. Louisiana's intentional act exception put forth by Smith's parents requires a showing the employer consciously desired the physical result or knew it was fairly certain to happen as a result of the employer's conduct. Because Smith's co-workers each testified they were nowhere near him at the time of his accident, his parents were required to show an issue of material fact regarding an intentional act existed. Instead, Smith's parents only offered possible third-party causes for his death which failed to demonstrate his employer consciously desired his injury. Consequently, the appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling.

Continue reading "No Workers' Compensation Exception in St. Landry Parish Landfill Death" »