No. 50,636-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *
|
|
- Cecilia Quinn
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Judgment rendered July 6, Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 50,636-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * JOHN W. SMITH Plaintiff-Appellee Versus HIGHLINES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY Defendant-Appellant * * * * * Appealed from the Office of Workers Compensation, District 1-E Parish of Ouachita, Louisiana Docket No Brenza Irving Jones, Workers Compensation Judge * * * * * HAYES, HARKEY, SMITH & CASCIO, L.L.P. By: John B. Saye Clint R. Hanchey STREET & STREET By: C. Daniel Street Counsel for Appellant Counsel for Appellee * * * * * Before CARAWAY, DREW and PITMAN, JJ.
2 DREW, J. In this workers compensation proceeding, Highlines Construction Company ( Highlines ) appeals a judgment ordering it to pay $34, together with interest to claimant John Smith for prescription drugs that he obtained from Injured Workers Pharmacy ( IWP ), as well as a penalty of $2,000 and attorney fees of $5,000. Smith has answered the appeal, seeking reversal of that part of the judgment denying his claim of entitlement to permanent total disability ( PTD ) benefits. We affirm the denial of Smith s claim of entitlement to PTD benefits, and we also affirm the award of the penalty and attorney fees. We reverse the judgment insofar as it ordered Highlines to pay for prescription drugs provided by IWP. FACTS On August 7, 2003, John Smith was injured while moving steel panels at work for Highlines. Smith felt immediate neck and left upper extremity pain. Smith received workers compensation indemnity payments for 520 weeks. He also received medical benefits, including prescription drug coverage. Gray Insurance Company ( Gray ), the workers compensation insurer of Highlines, provided Smith with a TMESYS pharmacy card that Smith was to use to have his prescriptions filled at participating pharmacies. In May of 2013, Smith encountered difficulty in filling his prescriptions using the TMESYS card at a Walgreens pharmacy. Smith s wife, Faye, alleged that she was told by Walgreens employees that she would have to pay for his drugs because his case had been closed. Faye, who
3 usually handled getting the prescriptions filled, then contacted Smith s attorney, C. Daniel Street, who directed her to IWP. When IWP sought pre-authorization in May of 2013, Gray declined coverage and informed IWP that it would not pay its invoices and that Smith would have to obtain his drugs through Gray s process. IWP continued to fill Smith s prescriptions despite receiving repeated notices from Gray that it would not pay for the drugs provided by IWP. Smith filed this disputed claim for compensation against Highlines and Gray on July 15, 2013, contesting Gray s refusal to pay for his prescriptions filled by IWP. Smith sought attorney fees, penalties, and the amount owed at the time to IWP. On September 5, 2013, Gray gave notice of termination of benefits because Smith had received 520 weeks of indemnity benefits. Smith disagreed with the termination, arguing that he was totally and permanently disabled and entitled to medical and indemnity benefits. Smith amended his claim on September 25, 2013, to allege entitlement to permanent total disability benefits of $ per week from August 9, 2013, along with penalties and attorney fees. Following a trial, the WCJ ordered Highlines and Gray to pay $34, and interest to Smith for the IWP bill. Highlines and Gray were also ordered to pay a penalty of $2,000, and attorney fees of $5,000. Smith s claim for permanent total disability benefits was rejected. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs. 2
4 DISCUSSION Permanent total disability Smith contends that he is entitled to designation as being permanently totally disabled. La. R.S. 23:1221(2), which governs claims for PTD, states, in part: (a) For any injury producing permanent total disability of an employee to engage in any self-employment or occupation for wages, whether or not the same or a similar occupation as that in which the employee was customarily engaged when injured, and whether or not an occupation for which the employee at the time of injury was particularly fitted by reason of education, training, and experience, sixty-six and two-thirds percent of wages during the period of such disability. (b) For purposes of Subparagraph (2)(a) of this Paragraph, compensation for permanent total disability shall not be awarded if the employee is engaged in any employment or self-employment regardless of the nature or character of the employment or self-employment including but not limited to any and all odd-lot employment, sheltered employment, or employment while working in any pain. (c) For purposes of Subparagraph (2)(a) of this Paragraph, whenever the employee is not engaged in any employment or self-employment as described in Subparagraph (2)(b) of this Paragraph, compensation for permanent total disability shall be awarded only if the employee proves by clear and convincing evidence, unaided by any presumption of disability, that the employee is physically unable to engage in any employment or self-employment, regardless of the nature or character of the employment or self-employment, including, but not limited to, any and all odd-lot employment, sheltered employment, or employment while working in any pain, notwithstanding the location or availability of any such employment or self-employment. A claimant seeking PTD benefits bears the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, his inability to engage in any type of employment. Harris v. City of Bastrop, 49,534 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1/14/15), 161 So. 3d 948; State, DOTD v. Berry, 49,186 (La. App. 2d Cir. 8/13/14), 147 So. 3d
5 The clear and convincing standard in a workers compensation case is an intermediate standard falling somewhere between the ordinary preponderance of the evidence civil standard and the beyond a reasonable doubt criminal standard. To prove a matter by clear and convincing evidence means to demonstrate that the existence of the disputed fact is highly probable or much more probable than its nonexistence. Hollingsworth v. Steven Garr Logging, 47,884 (La. App. 2d Cir. 2/27/13), 110 So. 3d 1219; Young v. Physicians & Surgeons Hosp., 39,348 (La. App. 2d Cir. 3/2/05), 895 So. 2d 723. Following the 1983 amendments to the workers compensation statute, evidence that an employee could not return to any gainful employment without suffering substantial pain is no longer sufficient to support an award of permanent total disability benefits. Morgan v. Glazers Wholesale Drug Co., 46,692 (La. App. 2d Cir. 11/2/11), 79 So. 3d 417; Bank of Winnfield & Trust Co. v. Collins, 31,473 (La. App. 2d Cir. 2/24/99), 736 So. 2d 263. A left shoulder MRI taken a few days after the accident showed injury to that area. The next month, Dr. Douglas Liles performed surgery to repair Smith s torn left rotator cuff. Dr. Bernie McHugh, a neurosurgeon, examined Smith on January 4, 2005, on a workers compensation consultation. Smith complained of increasing cervical pain along with left upper extremity pain and radicular symptoms. He told Dr. McHugh that he was now retired from doing construction work. Dr. McHugh noted that a cervical MRI from October of 2004 showed severe spondylosis from C4 to C7. Dr. McHugh recommended that Smith receive epidural steroid injections, and if Smith saw 4
6 no relief from that, then they would discuss surgical decompression. Dr. McHugh referred Smith to Dr. John Ledbetter, who specialized in pain management. Dr. McHugh believed that he did not examine Smith again until April of 2014, a period of nine years. Smith first saw Dr. Ledbetter on March 16, 2005, telling him that he had retired on workers compensation. His chief complaints were neck pain and left arm numbness. Smith reported an intermittent pain that was worse when he was moving or twisting his neck. Dr. Ledbetter noted unintentional tremors in Smith s left upper extremity. Dr. Ledbetter s impressions were: (1) cervicalgia with right upper extremity radiculopathy with MRI 1 evidence of moderate to severe intervertebral disc disease at C4-7 with central stenosis and moderate foraminal stenosis, greater on the left; (2) cervical spondylosis with symptoms suggestive of facet arthropathy as well; (3) secondary myofascial pain; and (4) deconditioning. Dr. Ledbetter ordered three cervical epidural steroid injections and physical therapy 2 during that first visit. Over the course of the next nine years, Dr. Ledbetter s office regularly examined Smith and performed various medical procedures to help treat his pain. These procedures, which sometimes granted temporary relief, included cervical epidural steroid 1 A later MRI, taken on June 24, 2010, showed fusion of the C4-5 disc space; moderate spondylosis of the remaining C3-7 levels with disc bulging or protrusion at all three levels; moderate apophyseal joint hypertrophy at C2-4; slight degenerative subluxation at the C3-4 level; cord impingement but no impressive central stenosis; moderate C4 foraminal stenosis; and mild central stenosis at C5-7 with at least moderate bilateral foraminal stenosis at both levels greatest on the left at C6-7. Dr. Ledbetter thought the fusion at C4-5 was from a 2005 surgery performed by Dr. McHugh. of Dr. Ledbetter ordered physical therapy again in February of 2007 and in March 5
7 injections on six dates, facet joint injections once, radiofrequency medial branch neurotomies on four dates, trigger point injections on nine dates, and medial branch nerve blocks twice. Dr. Ledbetter noted in February of 2007 that Smith could be released to sedentary work. Two months later, a vocational assessment was performed, during which Smith tested as reading at the 5th grade level, spelling at the 3rd grade level, and doing arithmetic at the 1st grade level. A job search was focused in the Monroe area on security guard and courier positions. Security guard positions were found that fell within Smith s physical restrictions, but the positions were eliminated because of Smith s education level and his limited ability to read and write. On January 18, 2010, Dr. Ledbetter had a rehabilitation conference with Smith s case manager when he considered several positions for Smith. One position was as a sales representative at Sears that Dr. Ledbetter approved if Smith would be able to sit and rest as needed. A second position was as a service support representative at Sears. Dr. Ledbetter approved it and added that Smith could probably physically do it, but he would need to be able to sit and rest as needed. The third position was as a customer service representative at AT&T. Dr. Ledbetter approved it also, but again noted that Smith would need to be able to sit at will as needed. On August 25, 2011, Smith underwent a second medical opinion by Dr. Sandra Weitz. Her impressions were cervical spondylosis and left shoulder pain status post rotator cuff repair. She believed that Smith was left with only the option of medication management. She thought he was at maximum medical improvement, and that he needed a functional capacity 6
8 evaluation ( FCE ) to define his return to work status. Her impression was that he would most likely be capable of a sedentary level job. Smith, who was 74 years old at the time of the April 2015 trial, had worked for Highlines for 17 years before he was injured. When first hired at Highlines, he worked with a crew setting poles and stringing wire. He was then moved to a storeroom where he loaded and unloaded transformers with a forklift. Prior to working for Highlines, he was employed for 17 to 18 years by Boyte Enterprises building electrical substations. Other than working for a company called Universal for one week, Smith has not worked since he was injured. Smith explained that he still has problems with his neck, headaches, weakness in his left side, and no grip in his left hand. He also said his left arm trembles all the time, and his arm would stop working if he tried to use it for more than 15 to 20 minutes. He cannot do much lifting with his left arm. Smith s wife, Faye, testified that Smith did not have any physical restrictions on his activities before the accident, but now his left arm shakes and his lack of grip strength in his left hand limits his ability to do things such as unscrew something. Faye explained that her husband sometimes drops his fork, and he has trouble gripping his coffee cup. Smith is right-handed, but primarily uses his left hand for gripping objects. Smith testified that he could not do a job where he had to sit and answer a phone all day because he cannot hear well. He does not use the phone at home because of his hearing difficulties, so his wife has to answer the phone there. Faye deals with the medical offices and drugstores that call because Smith has poor hearing from working around heavy machinery. 7
9 Smith seldom drives his truck, and his wife usually brings him to the doctor. He explained that although Dr. Ledbetter has not told him to refrain from driving, he has enough sense to know not to drive, and he does not drive when he is unable to see. Smith could not tell the court what the two restrictions on his drivers license were despite having looked at his license a day earlier. Faye testified that although her husband can drive short distances, she still does most of the driving. According to Faye, Smith does not do much around the house, and is able to lift very little. He cannot wash dishes as he has already broken several cups. When she brings groceries home, he may take a box of cereal into their home. Smith is able to mow what he referred to as his small yard 3 using a riding lawn mower, but he has to stop after about 5-10 minutes to take a break. It does not take him more than 25 minutes to cut his grass, which he does every other week. His grandson trims his weeds and maintains the mower. Smith claimed that he does not take one of his prescribed drugs often because it makes him sleepy. Faye added that Smith s medicines sometimes make him go to sleep when he sits down, and they can make him dizzy. Dr. McHugh did not think any of the drugs prescribed by Dr. Ledbetter would have any effect on Smith s ability to perform work activities. Smith is able to walk without using a cane or a walker, and he walked into court without any assistance. He does not stay in bed, but gets up and 3 Smith and his wife live on an acre of land. She explained that part is fenced off from the back yard because they used to have horses when Smith was able to ride them. 8
10 moves around as recommended by Dr. Ledbetter, who encouraged him to walk and to exercise. Faye testified that Smith sometimes needs a cane to walk. Smith failed to complete the 8th grade. He has never had any vocational training, and he has never worked a sedentary or a clerical type job. Faye testified that Smith has never had any training for a sedentary job. She recalled that one job required him to use a computer just to apply for it, which he could not do. Smith did not know of any jobs that he could do, and if he could do anything, he thought that he would give out after only minutes. He recalled that a job had been found for him several years earlier, but he was disqualified from it because he could not lift what was required. Faye testified that Smith applied for the jobs at AT&T and Sears, but neither she nor his job coach ever heard why he was not hired for those jobs. Smith admitted that he can get to a job site, walk in, and sit in a chair, and can do something for a very short period of time. Faye testified that Smith cannot stand for very long because of his neck, and even if he is sitting down, he will still have to get up and walk around. She has seen him bend over and grab his neck while doing something like watching TV. She agreed that if there is a job that allows a person to sit, stand, and only use his arms occasionally, then he could work that job within his abilities, but only for a very short period of time. Smith underwent an FCE at Guillory s Therapy Clinic on February 7, Therapist John Guillory noted that: (i) Smith had bilateral upper extremity intention tremors more so on the left that tended to increase with 9
11 maximum efforts during the upper extremity lifts; (ii) his tremors appeared to increase with the arm lift, push and pull; (iii) his use of hand control should be with very low resistance and for very short period of time; and (iv) Smith said that sometimes that type of lifting will make it hurt, and sometimes it will not, but he was pretty sure it would hurt the next day. Guillory remarked that Smith s upper extremity intention tremors increased significantly with his effort during the dynamic lift portion of the test. It was Guillory s opinion that Smith gave maximum effort throughout the FCE, and was very pleasant and cooperative. It was also Guillory s opinion that Smith was not suitable to return to work at that time. Dr. McHugh believed he examined Smith for just the second time on April 17, A complete physical exam was not done; rather, it was a cursory exam. 4 Smith reported that he had continued cervical pain and upper extremity pain, numbness, and tingling, which was greater on the left, as well as lower extremity numbness and tingling, which was greater on the left as well. Smith also reported that he could do limited activity around his home but only for short periods of time. Dr. McHugh found Smith s cervical range of motion to be extremely limited. Smith s upper extremity strength remained the same as in Dr. McHugh reviewed the FCE evaluation from two months earlier and noted he agreed with the findings that Smith was not suitable to return to any type of gainful employment. However, in his deposition of November 11, 2014, Dr. McHugh had never asked Guillory if he meant Smith was not suitable to return to work at this 4 Some of the tests were stopped because of a breakdown in body mechanics. 10
12 time just in the construction industry. Dr. McHugh agreed that Smith could not return to work as a construction laborer. However, he thought Smith was capable of working a part-time sedentary job that adhered to the limits set forth in the FCE report, that allowed him to sit or stand as needed and did not require him to lift more than 10 pounds. Dr. Ledbetter was deposed for the first time on February 26, 2014, shortly after the FCE was done. He explained that he focused on the joints in the cervical spine when he began treating Smith. His last procedure was in April of 2013, but he continued to see Smith on about a monthly basis. Dr. Ledbetter thought Smith had a chronic pain problem, his function would not improve, and he would see a doctor indefinitely. 5 In regard to the FCE report, Dr. Ledbetter testified that he would defer to Guillory s findings; however, when further questioned about Guillory s statement regarding Smith s unsuitability to return to work, and whether that statement pertained to Smith s old job, a sedentary job, or any particular position, Dr. Ledbetter responded that he felt it probably referred to Smith s old job, but he was not certain as it could mean different things. Dr. Ledbetter agreed with his earlier assessment (2011) and could not say, more probably than not, that Smith could not return to a sedentary type of job. He also testified that until he received clarification about what Guillory had meant, he could not say that Smith was prohibited from doing any job whatsoever. If Guillory clarified his statement and said Smith could work at 5 Dr. Ledbetter thought in May of 2007 that Smith had reached maximum medical improvement, although he would need periodical trigger point injections of the neck and upper back areas, as well as repeat cervical facet radiofrequency neurotomies. 11
13 a sedentary level but nothing greater than that, then Dr. Ledbetter would probably approve those limited jobs for Smith. On May 22, 2014, Dr. Ledbetter examined Smith, who had ongoing chronic neck pain and was doing about the same. After reviewing the FCE report, Dr. Ledbetter noted that he did not believe that Smith was able to return to work. Dr. Ledbetter next saw Smith in August of Dr. Ledbetter was deposed for a second time on November 17, He thought Smith s condition would continue to degenerate. He had not received a clarification about what Guillory meant in the FCE report about suitability to work, but upon reviewing it, Dr. Ledbetter thought Guillory meant Smith could not return to his prior job. Dr. Ledbetter opined that Smith could probably work a part-time job with sedentary restrictions as he was not prevented from any employment whatsoever. Factual findings in workers compensation cases are subject to the manifest error or clearly wrong standard of appellate review. Banks v. Industrial Roofing & Sheet Metal Works, Inc., (La. 7/1/97), 696 So. 2d 551; Dombrowski v. Patterson-UTI Drilling Co., 46,249 (La. App. 2d Cir. 4/13/11), 63 So. 3d 308. To reverse a fact finder s determination under this standard of review, an appellate court must undertake a two-part inquiry: (1) the court must find from the record that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding of the trier of fact; and (2) the court must further determine that the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong. Stobart v. State through Dept. of Transp. & Dev., 617 So. 2d 880 (La. 1993); Dombrowski v. Patterson-UTI Drilling Co., supra. 12
14 Ultimately, the issue to be resolved by the reviewing court is not whether the trier of fact was right or wrong, but whether the fact finder s conclusion was a reasonable one. If the factual findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, a reviewing court may not reverse even though convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently. Stobart v. State, supra; Dombrowski v. Patterson-UTI Drilling Co., supra. Based on our review of the evidence in this record, we cannot conclude that the WCJ was clearly wrong in denying Smith s claim that he is permanently totally disabled. Smith did not show by clear and convincing evidence that he is unable to engage in any type of employment. As noted by the WCJ, the evidence shows that Smith is capable of sedentary work. IWP Statements Highlines contends that the WCJ erred in ordering it to pay for the prescriptions filled by IWP. Most of the background concerning Smith s history of obtaining medications to treat his work injury was supplied by Faye Smith, who helped her husband get his prescriptions filled. On June 20, 2007, Gray provided Smith with a TMESYS prescription card for him to use to obtain his prescription drugs. Faye initially used Mr. Discount Drugs to fill Smith s prescriptions, but decided to use Gray s mail order system in 2007 after Mr. Discount Drugs told her that Gray would pay only one-half of the cost of the drugs. The mail order system did not work to Faye s satisfaction because she had to call in to get the medicine refilled; as she was working at the time, there were often mistakes with the order. She related that it took her about 13
15 three times to get the medicines sent by mail, and by then Smith was already out of his medicine. She wanted to go to a pharmacy where she could deal with someone in person. When she used the TMESYS card, the pharmacy would have to call Gray to verify that Smith could receive the medicine. Sometimes, Faye would have to come back the next day to pick up the medicine. Smith received a new TMESYS card on October 28, Faye began using City Apothecary, which she did for a year and a half, but stopped when Smith later received a newer TMESYS card that did not list City Apothecary as a provider. Faye thought it was in December of 2012 that Smith received the newest card. She decided to begin using Walgreens at that point. She could have used Mr. Discount again, but she did not want to do so after what had happened earlier when she was told she would have to pay for one-half the cost of the medicine. According to Faye, Smith s prescriptions were filled the first time she took them to Walgreens, but the second time she was not able to get them filled. By her account, Walgreens employees told her that coverage was denied because the case had been closed. Faye then went to the office of Smith s attorney, C. Daniel Street, to alert him about what had happened. He directed her to IWP since she lacked the cash to pay for the drugs herself. Faye never contacted Gray about the denial before going to see Street. Except for when a new nurse at Dr. Ledbetter s office sent a prescription to Walgreens in August of 2014, Faye used exclusively IWP to 14
16 fill Smith s prescriptions related to his work injury until April of 2015, when IWP stopped mailing them. Faye admitted that Gray told her that it would not pay for the medications provided by IWP. She claimed that Gray called her and said that Smith s medicines had been referred to a deferred account where he would have to pay for them if he lost the case. She never received anything in writing directly from Gray. On May 29, 2013, IWP faxed a request for pre-authorization to Gray. On May 30, 2013, Brenda Guillot, a claims representative with Gray, sent a fax to IWP, which stated: As the insurers of Hoti, Inc., this office is involved in discharging that firm s obligations to its employee, Mr. John W. Smith, regarding his injuries allegedly sustained on the job. On several occasions we informed Beneta via telephone conversation, fax, and denying your Request for Pre-Authorization Form. As we stated repeatedly, all the medications were denied as Mr. Smith would need to continue receiving them through the normal process. Furthermore, this is not a referral from The Gray Insurance Company therefore, we are not responsible in honoring your invoice(s). Gray resent this fax to IWP in early June after it received a claim form and another request for pre-authorization. Gray also returned the request forms with NO marked in the approval boxes. On June 11, 2013, Gray received a claim form from IWP for $ On June 13, 2013, Guillot sent a fax to IWP which repeated most of the content of the earlier fax. In particular, it repeated that all the medications were denied because Smith would need to continue receiving them through the normal process, and Gray was not responsible for honoring the submitted 15
17 invoices. Guillot would resend this fax a few days later when IWP sent her a request for pre-authorization. On June 12, 2013, Street sent a bill for $ from IWP to Guillot. On June 24, 2013, Guillot wrote to Street: [P]lease allow this correspondence to put you on formal notice that The Gray Insurance Company chooses to use pharmacies and medication providers other than IWP and will not at any time be using IWP for anything whatsoever. If IWP provides any medications to Mr. Smith, then it will be without the approval of The Gray Insurance Company and will not be subject to payment or reimbursement and IWP has been placed on notice of this repeatedly. In fact, on several occasions IWP was informed verbally and through written notice of this, not only with your client. IWP is not and will not be an approved vendor of The Gray Insurance Company. On July 8, 2013, Street sent an IWP bill for $1, to Guillot. On July 22, 2013, Guillot wrote a letter to IWP in which she stated that Gray was putting IWP on notice that Gray chose to use pharmacies and medication providers other than IWP and would not be using IWP. Guillot further stated that if IWP provided any medications to Smith, then it would be without the approval of Gray and not subject to payment or reimbursement. Citing Sigler v. Rand, 6 the letter further stated that the right to choose a pharmacy does not belong to the employee. Guillot concluded by stating that if IWP contacted Gray for approval, the letter served as notice that such calls would not be tolerated and were unnecessary, and IWP was not to contact Gray because IWP was not an approved vendor. Between July of 2013 and March of 2015, Gray sent this same letter to IWP at least 59 times in response to claims for payment or requests for 6 Sigler v. Rand, (La. App. 3 Cir. 12/29/04), 896 So. 2d 189, writ denied, (La. 4/1/05), 897 So. 2d
18 pre-authorization. Street received copies of all these letters other than one on July 23, On May 15, 2014, Gray wrote to Dr. Ledbetter that they were putting him on formal notice that Gray chose to use pharmacies and medication providers other than IWP and would not at any time be using IWP for anything whatsoever. Gray added that if there was any delay or problem in obtaining medications from a pharmacy chosen by Gray, Guillot was to be informed by letter as soon as possible. If the problem could not be remedied, then Gray would choose another pharmacy. Whether a workers compensation insurer was required to pay for medications obtained from IWP was at issue before this court in Naron v. LIGA, 49,996 (La. App. 2d Cir. 9/9/15), 175 So. 3d 475. The WCJ had ruled that LIGA failed to meet its obligation under La. R.S. 23:1203(A) to furnish necessary drugs when an approved drugstore refused to fill Naron s prescription and told him that his medication coverage had expired, as well as when LIGA refused coverage for Naron s alternate choice of pharmacy. The WCJ also ruled that IWP was authorized to provide pharmacy services to Naron, and their services became a necessary element in fulfillment of La. R.S. 23:1203(A). La. R.S. 23:1203(A) provides: In every case coming under this Chapter, the employer shall furnish all necessary drugs, supplies, hospital care and services, medical and surgical treatment, and any nonmedical treatment recognized by the laws of this state as legal, and shall utilize such state, federal, public, or private facilities as will provide the injured employee with such necessary services. Medical care, services, and treatment may be provided by out-of-state providers or at out-of-state facilities when such care, services, 17
19 and treatment are not reasonably available within the state or when it can be provided for comparable costs. This court reversed the judgment ordering LIGA to pay IWP. While this court concluded that the choice of pharmacy belonged to Naron, his choice was limited by La. R.S. 23:1203(A), which stated that [m]edical care, services, and treatment may be provided by out-of-state providers... when such care, services, and treatment are not reasonably available within the state or when it can be provided for comparable costs. This court noted that it was clear that IWP was an out-of-state provider and the services it provided were reasonably available in Louisiana. Furthermore, this court noted that even if LIGA had violated its duty under La. R.S. 23:1203(A) when Naron was unable to obtain his prescriptions, Naron was still bound by the constraints of that statute since IWP was an out-of-state provider. Smith argues that there is no evidence in this record that IWP is an out-of-state provider. On the contrary, the numerous forms submitted by IWP to Gray that are in this record show Injured Workers Pharmacy, LLC, as having a Massachusetts physical address. Applying the rationale in Naron v. LIGA, we conclude that Highlines and Gray were not obligated to reimburse IWP for the medications that it provided to Smith. Therefore, the WCJ erred in ordering Highlines and Gray to do so. Penalty and attorney fees Implicit within the requirements of La. R.S. 23:1203(A) that the employer furnish all necessary drugs is that those drugs be supplied timely. Sigler v. Rand, supra. 18
20 Failure to provide payment of benefits will result in a penalty and attorney fees unless the claim is reasonably controverted or if such nonpayment results from conditions over which the employer or insurer had no control. La. R.S. 23:1201(F)(2). Awards of penalties and attorney fees in workers compensation cases are essentially penal in nature, and are intended to deter indifference and undesirable conduct by employers and insurers toward injured employees. Iberia Medical Ctr. v. Ward, (La. 11/30/10), 53 So. 3d 421. Penal provisions are strictly construed. Id. The WCJ s grant or denial of penalties and attorney fees under the workers compensation statute is subject to manifest error review. Thomas v. Browning-Ferris Inc., (La. 2/25/05), 894 So. 2d 1091; Tingle v. Page Boiler, Inc., 50,373 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1/13/16), 186 So. 3d 220. Smith contends that the choice of pharmacy issue has nothing to do with the denial of prescription drug coverage at Walgreens that prompted Smith to use IWP in the first place. We agree. Gray directed Smith to use Walgreens by listing it as one of the pharmacy providers on the TMESYS cards that Gray mailed to him. Smith did as he was told, yet he was unable to timely procure a drug prescribed to treat his workers compensation injury. As such, it cannot be said that Gray reasonably controverted this claim. Furthermore, because Gray failed to fill its obligation under La. R.S. 23:1203(A) when Smith was denied his prescription medicine at Walgreens, Gray was properly ordered to pay a penalty and attorney fees. In Naron v. LIGA, supra, the claimant used a pharmacy card provided by his insurer without any problems until the pharmacy that he had been 19
21 using declined to fill his prescription because coverage had expired. The claimant s attorney then referred him to IWP. The insurer, LIGA, paid for the first invoice that it received from IWP, but it also told IWP that the claimant was to use his pharmacy card. LIGA then refused to pay for future invoices received from IWP. In contrast, from our review of the record, it does not appear that Gray ever paid for even the prescriptions that were denied at Walgreens. Accordingly, the WCJ was not clearly wrong in ordering Highlines and Gray to pay a penalty of $2,000 and attorney fees of $5,000. CONCLUSION With each party to bear its own costs, we reverse the judgment insofar as it ordered Gray and Highlines to pay the IWP bill. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. REVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED. 20
No. 48,126-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered June 26, 2013 Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La.-CCP. No. 48,126-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA JOHNNY LLOYD SMITH,
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G DANNY FOSTER, EMPLOYEE
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G209522 DANNY FOSTER, EMPLOYEE J & K SALES, LLC, EMPLOYER FIRSTCOMP INSURANCE COMPANY, CARRIER/TPA CLAIMANT
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G JON HARTMAN, EMPLOYEE
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G300315 JON HARTMAN, EMPLOYEE EXTERIOR SOLUTIONS, INC., EMPLOYER TRAVELERS INSURANCE, CARRIER/TPA CLAIMANT
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE, RESPONDENT INSURANCE CARRIER
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F411831 KRISTI FISHER STAFF MARK CLAIMANT RESPONDENT AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE, RESPONDENT INSURANCE CARRIER OPINION FILED SEPTEMBER 20, 2010
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT ************
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 08-0705 J. C. WHITE, JR. VERSUS RATCLIFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY ************ APPEAL FROM THE OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION,
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA John Leca, : Petitioner : : v. : : Workers' Compensation : Appeal Board : (School District of Philadelphia), : No. 404 C.D. 2013 Respondent : Submitted: June 28,
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F METRO MAINTAINERS, INC. FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE INSURANCE CARRIER
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F410613 STEPHEN HAYMOND METRO MAINTAINERS, INC. FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 15, 2010 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 15, 2010 Session LINDA LEE KENNEY v. SHIROKI NORTH AMERICA, INC. ET AL. Appeal from the General Sessions
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G DAVID CONWAY, EMPLOYEE FIRESTONE BUILDING PRODUCTS, LTD.
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G408467 DAVID CONWAY, EMPLOYEE FIRESTONE BUILDING PRODUCTS, LTD., EMPLOYER OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE CO./SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED JULY 17, Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ELIZABETH DANIELSON in Springdale, Washington County, Arkansas.
CLAIM NO. F512187 FRANK RICHARDSON TYSON, INC. TYNET CORPORATION INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JULY 17, 2006 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ELIZABETH DANIELSON
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC. PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INS. CO.
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F205940 THOMAS JENKINS HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC. PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INS. CO. INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F400779/F BERRYVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES INSURANCE CARRIER
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F400779/F408281 BARRY HARDIN BERRYVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 27, 2006 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 27, 2006 Session FABIAN TIMMONS V. TAYLOR FARMS TENNESSEE, INC. AND ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 117,387 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. DAVID SMITH, Appellant, REX PRYOR, Warden, Appellee.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 117,387 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS DAVID SMITH, Appellant, v. REX PRYOR, Warden, Appellee. MEMORANDUM OPINION Appeal from Leavenworth District Court;
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G WESLEY L. HARRIS, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JANUARY 13, 2015
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G209944 WESLEY L. HARRIS, EMPLOYEE JOHN YOUNG COMPETITIVE PAVING, UNINSURED EMPLOYER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JANUARY 13, 2015 Hearing
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D05-619
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2005 ANN SMITH, A/K/A ANNIE MAY SMITH, WARD, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D05-619 NATHAN D. SMITH, II, PETITIONER, ET AL., Appellee.
No. 44,149-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered April 15, 2009. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, LSA-CCP. No. 44,149-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * HOLLEY
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT In the Interest of A.W.J., a child. N.J., Appellant, v. Case No.
LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT. IN THE MATTER OF the Legal Profession Act (the LPA ); and
File No. HE20070047 LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT IN THE MATTER OF the Legal Profession Act (the LPA ); and IN THE MATTER OF a Hearing regarding the conduct of Calum J. Bruce, a Member
ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO JULY TERM, 2011
Note: Decisions of a three-justice panel are not to be considered as precedent before any tribunal. ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2010-473 JULY TERM, 2011 In re Grievance of Lawrence Rosenberger
v No Washtenaw Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S ALFONSO IGNACIO VIGGERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED August 15, 2017 v No. 334522 Washtenaw Circuit Court AL-AZHAR F. PACHA and ALPAC, INC.,
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT ************
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 04-1399 WILLIAM T. LOWERY, SR. VERSUS GREGORY ALLEN HERBERT, ET AL ************ APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. LANDRY,
In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO CV
Opinion issued November 30, 2009 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-07-00572-CV CORY WAYNE MAGEE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND TRACEY D ANN MAYO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Docket No. CR ) Plaintiff, ) Chicago, Illinois ) March, 0 v. ) : p.m. ) JOHN DENNIS
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 117,712 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, SAWAN DILIP PATIDAR, Appellant.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 117,712 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. SAWAN DILIP PATIDAR, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Affirmed. Appeal from Dickinson
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Bollinger Shipyards, Case: Inc., et 16-60370 al v. DOWCP, et Document: al 00513996362 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/17/2017Doc. 503996362 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F (05/27/05) EMMA J. TINER, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F511762 (05/27/05) EMMA J. TINER, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT MOTOR APPLIANCE CORP., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INS. CO., CARRIER RESPONDENT
United States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 09-3082 LORD OSUNFARIAN XODUS, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, WACKENHUT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 18, 2013 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 18, 2013 Session KENNER D. ENSEY v. KARLA DAVIS, COMMISSIONER OF THE TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ET AL. Appeal from
No. 104,839 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, CASSIDY LEE SMITH, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
No. 104,839 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. CASSIDY LEE SMITH, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Motions to suppress are intended to exclude evidence obtained
Wears Valley Ranch Mentor Application Process
Wears Valley Ranch Mentor Application Process Step One: Fill out and submit the application Thank you for your interest in serving the Lord at Wears Valley Ranch. In order to help us get to know you better,
Doctor Louis Rose - Plaintiff - Cross
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF BRONX: CIVIL DIVISION - PART IA-23 --------------------------------------------------------x HARRIS WALLACE, Plaintiff, -versus- CIPPIAN LIMOUSINE, INC.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 114,973 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. ANTHONY SMITH, Appellant, REX PRYOR, Appellant.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 114,973 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS ANTHONY SMITH, Appellant, v. REX PRYOR, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Appeal from Leavenworth District Court; GUNNAR
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G CASSANDRA F. SMITH, EMPLOYEE
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G207825 CASSANDRA F. SMITH, EMPLOYEE BAPTIST HEALTH, SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER CLAIMS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR CLAIMANT
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
REL: 04/17/2009 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
Chapter 33 Fr Quinton* 100
Chapter 33 Fr Quinton* 100 Introduction 33.1 Fr Quinton is a member of a religious order. He was born in 1935 and ordained in 1960. He worked abroad for a number of years and then returned to Ireland.
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In re Estate of JOSEPH G. BERG, JR., Deceased. LUCILLE WOLCOTT and LAWRENCE BERG, Petitioners-Appellants, UNPUBLISHED March 13, 2007 v No. 272255 Bay County Probate Court
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT C/W SAFEWAY INSURANCE COMPANY OF LOUISIANA, ET AL. ************
DAVID CHAPMAN, ET AL. VERSUS STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 06-0529 C/W 06-0530 SAFEWAY INSURANCE COMPANY OF LOUISIANA, ET AL. ************ APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ROBERT MARTIN HANNEWALD, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED March 1, 2011 v No. 295589 Jackson Circuit Court SCOTT A. SCHWERTFEGER, RONALD LC No. 09-002654-CZ HOFFMAN,
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G JUANA BARRERA, Employee. COMPASS GROUP USA, INC., Employer
BEFORE THE RKNSS WORKERS' COMPENSTION COMMISSION CLIM NO. G303667 JUN BRRER, Employee COMPSS GROUP US, INC., Employer NEW HMPSHIRE INSURNCE COMPNY, Insurance Carrier/TP CLIMNT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION
AN ECCLESIASTICAL POLICY AND A PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF MINISTERIAL STANDING of the AMERICAN BAPTIST CHURCHES OF NEBRASKA PREAMBLE:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 AN ECCLESIASTICAL POLICY AND A PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF MINISTERIAL STANDING of
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 27, 2010
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 27, 2010 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DON SIDDALL Appeal from the Hamilton County Criminal Court No. 267654 Don W. Poole, Judge
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F ARNOLD DRONE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT NESTLE USA, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F704816 ARNOLD DRONE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT NESTLE USA, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT INS. CO.-STATE OF PA., CARRIER RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MARCH
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE (JULY 20, 2000 SESSION)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE (JULY 20, 2000 SESSION) BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC. v. FERNANDO GONZALES Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2010
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2010 Opinion filed December 29, 2010. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D10-1509 Lower Tribunal No.
Marsh, Michael v. MAYEKAWA USA
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims and Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Law 6-2-2015 Marsh, Michael v.
Position(s) applied for Date of application / / m Walk-in m Bellevue Member, if different from above NAME. Name. Current Address.
Bellevue Application for Employment b a p t i s t c h u r c h PLEASE PRINT Position(s) applied for Date of application / / Are you seeking: m Full-time m Part-time m Summer only m Seasonal Referral Source:
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS: DENNIS R. BROWN DENNIS H. GEISLEMAN Geisleman & Brown LLP Fort Wayne, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: KARL L. MULVANEY NANA QUAY-SMITH BRIANA L. CLARK Bingham
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED June 24, 2014 v No. 315267 Grand Traverse Circuit Court STEVEN RICHARD, LC No. 13-011510-FH Defendant-Appellant.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 114,105 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. TINENE BEAVER, Appellant, STEWART ENSIGN, Appellee.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 114,105 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS TINENE BEAVER, Appellant, v. STEWART ENSIGN, Appellee. MEMORANDUM OPINION 2016. Affirmed. Appeal from Shawnee District
No. 46,793-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered February 8, 2012 Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 46,793-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * LANDON
United States Court of Appeals
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Argued October 3, 2017 Decided November
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT MEIGS COUNTY
[Cite as State v. Smith, 2011-Ohio-965.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT MEIGS COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, : : Plaintiff-Appellee, : Case No. 09CA16 : vs. : Released: February 24, 2011
Appealed from the 23rd Judicial District Court in and for the Parish of Assumption State of Louisiana Docket Number Jeffrey Michael Heggelund
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2007 CA 2535 PATRICIA BROOKS AND LEO BROOKS VERSUS FATHER OLIVER OBELE AND CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BATON ROUGE Judgment
Alabama UC Bootcamp. Alabama Unemployment Bootcamp for Employers Getting Fit to Win Part 2
Alabama UC Bootcamp Alabama Unemployment Bootcamp for Employers Getting Fit to Win Part 2 Presented by: Alabama Cooperative Extension System Tommy Eden, Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLP Rosemary Elebash,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO CLARENCE R. MARSHALL ) CASE NO. CV 11 771202 ) Plaintiff-appellant ) JUDGE JOHN P. O'DONNELL ) vs. ) ) MM EMS, LLC, et al. ) JOUNRAL ENTRY AFFIRMING )
STATE OF OHIO ERIC SMITH
[Cite as State v. Smith, 2010-Ohio-4006.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 93593 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. ERIC SMITH DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
COOK COUNTY SHERIFF'S MERIT BOARD. Docket # 1850 DECISION
COOK COUNTY SHERIFF'S MERIT BOARD Sheriff of Cook County vs. Jacquelyn G. Anderson Cook County Deputy Sheriff Docket # 1850 DECISION THIS MATTER COMING ON to be heard pursuant to notice, the Cook County
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION E. Kwan Choi, individually and on behalf of Urantia Foundation, Urantia Corporation, Urantia Brotherhood Association,
Sheryl Smith v. Andrew Whelan
2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-7-2014 Sheryl Smith v. Andrew Whelan Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 13-3167 Follow this
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT MOUNT ZION MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH **********
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 11-0961 MOUNT ZION MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH VERSUS AMEAL JONES, SR. ********** APPEAL FROM THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF RAPIDES, NO. 240,167
Court of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Cute Little Cake Shop v. State of Ohio Unemp., 2015-Ohio-527.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 101691 CUTE LITTLE CAKE SHOP
PITTSBURGH. Issued: March 1993 Revised: October 2002 Updated: August 2003 Updated: August 2006 Updated: March 2008 Updated: April 2014
Issued: March 1993 Revised: October 2002 Updated: August 2003 Updated: August 2006 Updated: March 2008 Updated: April 2014 CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH Clergy Sexual Misconduct The teaching of the Church,
Case: 1:11-cv DCN Doc #: 2 Filed: 11/03/11 1 of 12. PageID #: 13
Case: 1:11-cv-02374-DCN Doc #: 2 Filed: 11/03/11 1 of 12. PageID #: 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION WILLIAM T. PHELPS, 464 Chestnut Drive Berea,
COMMITTEE HANDBOOK WESTERN BRANCH BAPTIST CHURCH 4710 HIGH STREET WEST PORTSMOUTH, VA 23703
COMMITTEE HANDBOOK WESTERN BRANCH BAPTIST CHURCH 4710 HIGH STREET WEST PORTSMOUTH, VA 23703 Revised and Updated SEPTEMBER 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS General Committee Guidelines 3 Committee Chair 4 Committee
Clayton, Carolyn v. Speedway, LLC
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims and Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Law 8-11-2017 Clayton, Carolyn
S10A1598. WALLER et al. v. GOLDEN et al. Craig and Jena Golden s neighbors, the Wallers, appeal from a
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: February 28, 2011 MELTON, Justice. S10A1598. WALLER et al. v. GOLDEN et al. 1 Craig and Jena Golden s neighbors, the Wallers, appeal from a Superior Court of Henry
Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: FEBRUARY 4, 2011; 10:00 A.M. TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2009-CA-002226-MR JOANNE SMITH APPELLANT APPEAL FROM HART CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE GEOFFREY P. MORRIS,
Model Policies and Procedures for Response to Allegations of Sexual Abuse 1
Model Policies and Procedures for Response to Allegations of Sexual Abuse 1 General Statement of Guidelines 2 The [name of diocese, religious community/institute, or organization] will manage the issue
Bylaws Bethlehem United Church of Christ of Ann Arbor, Michigan
Amended 11/11/2018 Bylaws of Bethlehem United Church of Christ of Ann Arbor, Michigan Bethlehem United Church of Christ Bylaws TABLE OF CONTENTS Article I Name 1 Article II Purpose 1 Article III Affiliation
Cornerstone Schools of Alabama, Inc th Street North, Birmingham, Alabama (205) ~ Fax (205) Application for Employment
Cornerstone Schools of Alabama, Inc. 118 55 th Street North, Birmingham, Alabama 35212 (205) 591-7600 ~ Fax (205) 769-0063 Application for Employment Date Social Security # Type of Employment Applied For:
Building Board CITY OF PUNTA GORDA, FLORIDA OCTOBER 24, 2017, 9:00 AM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS W. MARION AVENUE, PUTNA GORDA FL 33950
Building Board CITY OF PUNTA GORDA, FLORIDA OCTOBER 24, 2017, 9:00 AM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 326 W. MARION AVENUE, PUTNA GORDA FL 33950 NOTE: Anyone wishing to address the Council on any agenda item may
Respondent. PETITIONERS Vickers, UCE, Ready
SUPREME COURT DAVID VICKERS as PRESIDENT OF UPSTATE CITIZENS FOR EQUALITY, INC.; DOUG READY Petitioners, COUNTY OF ONEIDA STATE OF NEW YORK NOTICE OF PETITION Pursuant to Article 78 of NY CPLR -vs- Index
: Brian Stirling, Acting Chairman Suzy Hackett, Robert Haynes, Jeffery Masters, Timothy Meyer, Thomas TJ Thornberry
: Brian Stirling, Acting Chairman Suzy Hackett, Robert Haynes, Jeffery Masters, Timothy Meyer, Thomas TJ Thornberry : Sean Howard : Suzy Russell, License & Permit Supervisor Kelly Fernandez, Board Attorney
EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION
EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION Southfield Village is an equal opportunity employer. Applicants are considered for employment without regard to race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, veteran
BEFORE THE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
BEFORE THE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA APPLICANT: SINGER BROS. RELIEF SOUGHT: DETERMINE ELECTION UNDER ORDER NO. 592239 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 17 NORTH, RANGE 16 WEST,
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2012
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2012 Opinion filed February 15, 2012. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D11-1526 Lower Tribunal
A Guide to Interim Ministry
A Guide to Interim Ministry CONSIDERATIONS FOR ENGAGING AN INTERIM MINISTER Though CBOQ recognizes that the selection of pastors is a task incumbent on the individual church, and that this extends to hiring
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: June 1, 2006 98719 ERNEST L. et al., Individually and as Parents and Guardians of NATASHA L., an Infant,
Applicant Information:
Borough of Eatontown Date: 47 Broad Street, Eatontown, NJ 07724 Employment Application Applicant Information: Name(Last, First, Middle): City/Town: Phone(Work): (Home): Social Security Number: - - Position
Legacy Christian Academy Application for Employment
Personal Information CHECK ONE: New Applicant Former Applicant Former Employee Dates: AREA OF INTEREST Pre-Kindergarten Teacher Physical Education Administrative Assistant Elementary (K5 6 th ) Teacher
WHEN AND HOW MUST AN EMPLOYEE S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS BE ACCOMMODATED? HEALTH DIRECTORS LEGAL CONFERENCE JUNE 8, 2017
WHEN AND HOW MUST AN EMPLOYEE S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS BE ACCOMMODATED? HEALTH DIRECTORS LEGAL CONFERENCE JUNE 8, 2017 Diane M. Juffras School of Government THE LAW Federal First Amendment to U.S. Constitution
PART A TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE
_ 1 CONTRACT FOR EMPLOYMENT This contract for employment ( the Contract ) is made between the Islamic Society of Darwin (the ISD ), of 53 Vanderlin Drive, Wanguri, Northern Territory, and (the Imam
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED March 11, 2003 v No. 234749 Berrien Circuit Court ROBERT LEE THOMAS, LC No. 2000-402258-FC Defendant-Appellant.
Brochure of Robin Jeffs Registered Investment Advisor CRD # Ashdown Place Half Moon Bay, CA Telephone (650)
Item 1. Cover Page Brochure of Robin Jeffs Registered Investment Advisor CRD #136030 6 Ashdown Place Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 Telephone (650) 712-8591 rjeffs@comcast.net May 27, 2011 This brochure provides
RENDERED: AUGUST 31, 2001; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED NO CA MR WAL-MART STORES, INC. OPINION REVERSING AND REMANDING ** ** ** ** **
RENDERED: AUGUST 31, 2001; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED C ommonwealth Of K entucky Court Of A ppeals NO. 2000-CA-002369-MR WAL-MART STORES, INC. APPELLANT APPEAL FROM BREATHITT CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE
No. 52,605-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered April 10, 2019. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 52,605-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * KENNETH
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 17 November 2015
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED MARCH 26, 2007
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F509872 BILLY THOMPSON BLACKBYRD ESTATES SMR HORNET FRAMING SECOND INJURY FUND CLAIMANT NO. 1 RESPONDENT NO. 2 RESPONDENT NO. 3 RESPONDENT
Contract Year
TEACHER-MINISTER CONTRACT This contract is made this day of 20, in the city of, State of Ohio between, hereinafter called School, and, hereinafter called Teacher-Minister. This contract is between the
STATE OF MAINE CHRISTIAN NIELSEN. [ 1] Christian Nielsen appeals from a judgment of conviction entered in the
MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Decision: 2008 ME 77 Docket: Oxf-07-645 Argued: April 8, 2008 Decided: May 6, 2008 Reporter of Decisions Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, ALEXANDER, LEVY, SILVER, and MEAD,
it had received from the Willingboro School District (Willingboro) regarding Craig Bell. Willingboro
IN THE MATTER OF : NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THE CREDENTIAL OF : STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS CRAIG BELL : ORDER OF REVOCATION : DOCKET NO: 1112-137 At its meeting of November 1, 2011, the State Board
FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH POLICIES
FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH POLICIES 95 WEST MORSE STREET FORSYTH, GEORGIA 31029 www.fbcforsyth.com (478) 994-5240 March 10, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS OPERATIONS POLICIES Definitions and Final Authority Operations
FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 05/20/ :33 PM INDEX NO. 2014EF5188 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 95 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/20/2016. Exhibit E
FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 05/20/2016 02:33 PM INDEX NO. 2014EF5188 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 95 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/20/2016 Exhibit E Goodwin Procter LLP Counselors at Law 901 New York Avenue, N.W. T: 202.346.4000
(My Sister's House) c/o "my Friends house" 1328 Oregon Sabetha, KS 66534
(My Sister's House) c/o "my Friends house" 1328 Oregon Sabetha, KS 66534 General Information (My Sister's House) is a discipleship home that believes that true recovery and deliverance from our old life
167 Cal.App.4th 206 (2008) ROBERT M. GUNN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MARINERS CHURCH, INC., Defendant and Respondent. No. G
167 Cal.App.4th 206 (2008) ROBERT M. GUNN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MARINERS CHURCH, INC., Defendant and Respondent. No. G038445. Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Three. September
Church of Living Waters
Rev. Dr. Paul Carrette Senior Pastor Church of Living Waters Dominica Missions Trip Registration Packet Name: Date: Included in this packet: 1. Personal Data Form 2. Medical Information and Release Form
Know The Treatment Procedure. Of A Pain Clinic
Know The Treatment Procedure Of A Pain Clinic Have you ever been feeling problem from a pain which will just not get away? Why you get up sad when there are methods to take complete control of the trouble?
JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH DECISION 1315
JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH DECISION 1315 IN RE: Appeal of the Opinions and Decision of the Western Jurisdiction Committee on Appeals in the Matter of Filimone Havili Mone LDIGEST The
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 17-AA-13
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 17-AA-13 2461 CORPORATION T/A MADAM S ORGAN, PETITIONER, MAY 1, 2018 V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD, RESPONDENT. Petition for Review