Shell Chemicals Geismar v. Walker

344 So.3d 158

SHELL CHEMICALS GEISMAR, Tristar Risk Management

v.Grant WALKER

2021 CA 1528

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

Judgment rendered JULY 05, 2022

Mark G. Montiel, Jr., Michael E. Johnson, Jr., Maxwell A. Malvin, New Orleans, Louisiana, Attorneys for Appellant Shell Chemicals Geismar LP

Robert Glueck, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Attorney for Appellee Grant Walker

BEFORE: GUIDRY, HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ.

HOLDRIDGE, J.

Shell Chemicals Geismar, LP (Shell) appeals a judgment by the Office of Workers’ Compensation (OWC) dismissing its claim for restitution of workers’ compensation benefits pursuant to the Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Fraud Statute, La. R.S. 23:1208. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

On June 4, 2019, Grant Walker filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits against Shell in the OWC. Therein, he claimed that on the evening of March 29, 2018, he tripped over a pipe while working at Shell's Geismar facility, entered a backed-up tanker, and fell on his back. It is undisputed that Mr. Walker was employed by Shell on the date of the accident. It is further undisputed that Mr. Walker was paid indemnity benefits at the maximum indemnity rate from April 2, 2018, through May 19, 2019, and received medical benefits from March 29, 2018, through January 7, 2020, following the accident.

On January 7, 2020, Shell notified Mr. Walker that compensation benefits were being terminated on the basis that Mr. Walker's treating physician, Dr. Henry Eiserloh, III, opined that Mr. Walker temporarily exacerbated his pre-existing lumbar injury in the work accident, which resolved no more than six months after the accident. Later that month, Shell filed a reconventional demand against Mr. Walker, asserting that he forfeited any right to benefits he may have been entitled to by making false statements for the purpose of obtaining benefits in violation of La. R.S. 23:1208.

Thereafter, on February 10, 2020, Shell filed a motion for summary judgment, urging that Mr. Walker received all compensation benefits to which he was entitled and forfeited any right to further compensation benefits by willfully making multiple false statements and representations for the purpose of obtaining benefits in his deposition, in discovery responses, and to Dr. Eiserloh, who treated Mr. Walker following the accident. On July 15, 2020, the Workers’ Compensation Judge signed a judgment granting Shell's motion in part and denying the motion in part. The WCJ ruled that Shell met all of its responsibilities with respect to indemnity and medical benefits owed to Mr. Walker arising from the work accident and dismissed Mr. Walker's claim for additional benefits arising from the March 29, 2018 accident.¹ The WCJ denied Shell's motion for summary judgment on the fraud issue.

Trial proceeded on Shell's reconventional demand. Shell attempted to demonstrate that Mr. Walker made misstatements regarding extensive medical treatments he received for his pre-existing back condition for the purpose of obtaining workers’ compensation benefits. During the trial, Mr. Walker testified and voluminous documentary evidence was entered into the record.

On July 30, 2021, the WCJ signed a judgment finding that Mr. Walker did not violate La. R.S. 23:1208, did not forfeit his benefits, and did not owe restitution to Shell. In making this finding, the WCJ specifically found that Mr. Walker's testimony was credible. The WCJ considered each of the bases upon which Shell's restitution demand rested and rejected them, ultimately finding that Mr. Walker did not willfully make false statements regarding his prior back condition in order to obtain compensation benefits. The WCJ found as a fact that Mr. Walker notified Dr. Eiserloh of his prior back issue and also disclosed his pre-existing back condition during his deposition. The WCJ stressed that while Mr. Walker's responses may not have been as detailed as Shell would have liked, Mr. Walker never denied having a pre-existing back condition. The WCJ also accepted Mr. Walker's attorney's explanation that he answered an interrogatory regarding prior medical treatment for Mr. Walker's back condition in error.

In this appeal, Shell contends that the WCJ committed reversible error in concluding that Mr. Walker did not commit fraud under La. R.S. 23:1208. We disagree.

Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1208A provides that it shall be unlawful for any person, for the purpose of obtaining workers’ compensation benefits, to willfully make...