Lester v. Southern Cas. Ins. Co.

Decision Date01 April 1985
Docket NumberNo. 84-C-2037,84-C-2037
PartiesWilliam A. LESTER v. SOUTHERN CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, et al. 466 So.2d 25
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court

Gerard F. Thomas, Jr., Natchitoches, Samuel Gainsburgh, New Orleans, Thomas, Donahoe & Gregory, Natchitoches, for plaintiff-applicant.

Henry Bruser, III, Peggy St. John, Gold, Little, Simon, Weems & Bruser, Alexandria, for defendants-respondents.

MARCUS, Justice.

William A. Lester, while working as a laborer in the forest and wood products business for Willett Timber Co., Inc. (Willett), lost his left foot and part of his left leg in an accident on July 18, 1970. Ultimately, he was fitted with an artificial limb. His employer's worker's compensation insurer, Southern Casualty Insurance Company (Southern), paid weekly compensation benefits at the maximum rate ($49 per week) for the maximum period of time (500 weeks) as provided by law for permanent total disability at the time of the injury. 1 The last compensation payment was made on February 23, 1980. Southern also paid $10,044.69 in medical expenses. This amount did not exceed the statutory maximum in effect when Lester was injured. 2 The last medical payment was made on January 25, 1980.

From August 10, 1981 to October 26, 1982, Lester incurred additional medical expenses in connection with his artificial limb totaling $544.09, and he was informed that his artificial limb had become worn out and needed to be replaced at a cost of $1,390.27. When payment of these expenses was refused, Lester, on December 22, 1982, filed suit against Willett and Southern for recovery of past medical expenses, travel expenses to a limbs and braces store, and the replacement cost of his artificial limb. Lester also sought penalties and attorney fees. Because the suit was brought more than one year after the last medical payment, defendants filed a plea of prescription.

After trial, the judge found that Lester's claims had prescribed under La.R.S. 23:1209 and rendered judgment dismissing Lester's demands against Willett and Southern. The court of appeal affirmed. 3 On Lester's application, we granted certiorari to review whether Lester's claims for medical expenses were properly dismissed as being barred by prescription. 4

At the time that suit was filed, La.R.S. 23:1209 provided:

In case of personal injury (including death resulting therefrom) all claims for payments shall be forever barred unless within one year after the accident or death the parties have agreed upon the payments to be made under this Chapter or unless within one year after the accident proceedings have been begun as provided in Parts III and IV of this Chapter. Where such payments have been made in any case, the limitation shall not take effect until the expiration of one year from the time of making the last payment, except that in cases of partial disability this limitation shall not take effect until three years from the time of making the last payment. Also, where the injury does not result at the time of, or develop immediately after the accident, the limitation shall not take effect until the expiration of one year from the time the injury develops, but in all such cases the claim for payment shall be forever barred unless the proceedings have been begun within two years from the date of the accident. [Emphasis added.]

As observed by Professors Malone and Johnson in their treatise on Louisiana Worker's Compensation Law, "the Act does not provide any specific prescriptive period for a claim for medical expenses, and the jurisprudence has been required to supply a period equivalent to that provided in Section 1209 for weekly benefit claims." 14 W. Malone & H. Johnson, Louisiana Civil Law Treatise: Workers' Compensation Law and Practice Sec. 384, p. 257 (2d ed. 1980). Our review of the jurisprudence indicates that it was this court's decision in Brown v. Travelers Insurance Co., 247 La. 7, 169 So.2d 540 (1964), that is primarily responsible for the application of Section 1209 to claims for medical expenses. In Brown, the employer's insurer voluntarily paid plaintiff compensation over a period of 400 weeks and assumed responsibility for his medical expenses during that time. Afterwards, plaintiff incurred additional medical expenses, and he filed suit for these expenses within a year of the last payment of compensation and medical expenses. Defendant argued that medical expenses were payments of compensation and that they must cease when compensation does. In rejecting defendant's argument and upholding plaintiff's claim, this court concluded that medical expenses as set forth in La.R.S. 23:1203 are not considered a part of compensation, that a claim for medical expenses can be independently asserted, and that such a claim is controlled by the prescriptive provision of La.R.S. 23:1209.

In the instant case, unlike the plaintiff in Brown, Lester's suit for medical expenses was filed more than a year after the last payment of compensation and medical expenses, and this compels us to reconsider the applicability of La.R.S. 23:1209 to claims for medical expenses. Specifically, the issue presented is whether the legislature intended "payments" as used in La.R.S. 23:1209 to include claims for medical expenses as well as claims for compensation benefits.

One indication that the legislature did not intend La.R.S. 23:1209 to apply to claims for medical expenses is that under such an interpretation it would be possible for a disabled worker's claims for medical expenses to prescribe before he could assert them. The instant case is exemplary. Under La.R.S. 23:1203, liability for medical expenses arises only as they are incurred. A plaintiff is not entitled to an award for future medical expenses, but the right to claim such expenses is always reserved to the plaintiff. Wilson v. Ebasco Services, Inc., 393 So.2d 1248 (La.1981); Allums v. Dixie Metals Co., 369 So.2d 1204 (La.App. 2d Cir.1979); Deshotels v. Fidelity and Casualty Co., 324 So.2d 895 (La.App. 3d Cir.1975). Lester received voluntary compensation payments for the maximum period of time allowed under La.R.S. 23:1221(2) at the time of the accident for an injury producing permanent total disability. He received his last medical payment on January 25, 1980, and his last compensation payment on February 23, 1980. Under Section 1209, Lester would then have "one year from the time of making the last payment" in which to assert a claim for medical expenses or his rights would prescribe. However, because he could not get an award for future medical expenses, those expenses incurred by him after one year from the last payment (in this case from August 10, 1981 to October 26, 1982) would prescribe before he could assert them.

Another indication that "payments" as used in La.R.S. 23:1209 does not include claims for medical expenses can be found in the language of the statute itself as amended by 1983 La.Acts, Ex.Sess., No. 1, Sec. 1, which reads in pertinent part:

Where such...

To continue reading

Request your trial
84 cases
  • Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc., 2008-C-1163.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • May 22, 2009
    ...... See Rodriguez v. Louisiana Med. Mut. Ins. Co., 618 So.2d 390 (La.1993) (holding that a statute must be applied and ... Jennings v. Louisiana Southern Life Insurance Co., 290 So.2d 811 (La.1974). In Jennings, we noted that ... Lester v. Southern Cas. Ins. Co., 466 So.2d 25 (La.1985). Given the focus of the ......
  • Gales v. Gold Bond Bldg. Products, Div. of Nat. Gypsum Co., 85-C-1351
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • September 8, 1986
    ...... Lester v. Southern Casualty Insurance Company, 466 So.2d 25 (La.1985); ... Finley v. Hardware Mutual Ins. Co., 110 So.2d 583 (La.1959); Wheat v. Ford, Bacon & Davis Constr. ...4th Cir.1976); Landry v. Bituminous Cas. Co., 244 So.2d 105 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1971); Stockstill v. Bituminous ......
  • Thomas v. Hartford Ins. Co., s. CA
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana (US)
    • February 28, 1989
    ...... Lester v. Southern Casualty Insurance Company, 466 So.2d 25 (La.1985). Thomas' cause of action for ......
  • McLin v. Industrial Specialty Contractors, 2002-C-1539.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • July 2, 2003
    ......Lester v. Southern Cas. Ins., 466 So.2d 25 (La.1985). See also Coats v. American ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT