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

 

Benefits erased for inmate living in halfway house

In Louisiana, an inmate living in a halfway house is not entitled to workers' compensation benefits for an injury that occurred while in a work-release program.

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

Case name: Blackledge v. Sol's Pipe & Steel, Inc., No. 46,148-CA (La. Ct. App. 03/23/11).

Ruling: The Louisiana Court of Appeal held that an inmate injured while working in a work-release program was not entitled to benefits.

What it means: In Louisiana, an inmate living in a halfway house is not entitled to workers' compensation benefits for an injury that occurred while in a work-release program.

Summary: An inmate injured his back and legs while working in a work-release program. At the time, he was living in a halfway house. He was confined to a wheelchair for several days after his injury and returned to work four weeks later. He sought workers' compensation benefits. The Louisiana Court of Appeal held that he was not entitled to benefits.

A state law prevents workers' compensation benefits from being collected during incarceration. The employer argued that the law prevents a prisoner from receiving a "financial windfall" while he is housed and fed by the state. The court said that the inmate's residence at a halfway house was considered incarceration. The court explained that workers' compensation benefits are a partial replacement of wages, but an incarcerated individual is not in a position to earn wages.

The inmate argued that his wages paid for his needs. As a part of the work-release program, the inmate was responsible for the cost of his room, board, clothing, and other necessary items. Any wages left over were to be paid upon his release. The court said this did not change its view.

Contrary to the inmate's arguments, the court concluded that the state law was constitutional. The court explained that the state has an interest in minimizing the costs of the workers' compensation program.

The court declined to award damages and attorney's fees to the employer for a frivolous appeal.

Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage.

May 12, 2011

Copyright 2011© 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.