Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

Court OKs 24-hour care for employee with brain injury

Employees have the burden of showing their current condition was caused by the work-related injury, especially when there is conflicting medical testimony.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

Case name: Richard v. Vermilion Hospital, No. 10-385 (La. Ct. App. 06/09/10).

Ruling: The Louisiana Court of Appeal held that the employee's condition that required 24-hour care resulted from a work-related accident and not from Alzheimer's disease.

What it means: Employees have the burden of showing their current condition was caused by the work-related injury, especially when there is conflicting medical testimony.

Summary: A hospital employee fell from a large metal trash container at work and sustained a traumatic brain injury. The employer paid workers' compensation benefits. After a few years, the employee's medical condition deteriorated to the degree that a doctor recommended he have 24-hour care in his home. The employee filed a claim for compensation. The parties disputed whether the employee's medical condition was caused by the work injury. The Louisiana Court of Appeal held that the employee's current condition was caused by the work-related injury and the 24-hour care was reasonable and medically necessary.

The hospital argued that the employee's condition was a result of the natural progression of Alzheimer's disease. Although there were conflicting medical opinions, the court decided that the evidence established a "reasonable possibility of causal connection" between the employee's current state and his work-related traumatic brain injury.

The hospital also argued that the employee's cognitive deficiencies started before his work accident. A supervisor testified that the employee became increasingly forgetful in the year before the injury, but he was a good employee and the forgetfulness did not affect his work. The court stated that if an employee was in good health before the accident, the disability is presumed to have resulted from the accident if the disabling condition began at the time of the accident. The court noted that the employee in this case was in "good health" before the work-related accident.

Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage.

August 30, 2010

Copyright 2010© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.