Trial Court Erred In Granting Summary Judgment In The Employee's Favor In His Negligence Suit Against His Employer Under The Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.S. App. � 688(A), And General Maritime Law As The Employer Was Entitled To Offset Disability Benefits It Had
MATTHEW WENDELBOE VERSUS SEARIVER MARITIME, INC.
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, FIRST CIRCUIT
2006 La. App. LEXIS 2472
November 3, 2006, Judgment Rendered
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellee employee sued appellant employer for negligence and sought damages under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.S. App. � 688(a), and general maritime law. The employer sought an offset for disability benefits the employee had received. The 19th Judicial District Court of East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, held that the disability plan was a fringe benefit, and the employer was not entitled to a reduction. The employer appealed.
OVERVIEW: On review, the employer contended the trial court erred in granting the employee's motion for summary judgment, thus shielding his disability benefits from offset by the employer against any tort litigation recovery he might have received. The appellate court agreed, finding first that the employer was both the alleged tortfeasor and the would-be "independent" source that funded the disability plan. As these conceptual identities were merged in the same entity, there was no true collateral source here. The inquiry hinged on the nature of the plan at issue, and the intent of the employer through the plan to avoid a double payment for both benefits and tort recovery was what controlled. The language of 45 U.S.C.S. � 55 clearly aimed to provide a means by which employees could receive employer assistance and compensation for their injuries and employers had an incentive to provide such benefits while protecting themselves against double payment obligations. In the instant case, the employer's plan clearly expressed its intent to do so, in accordance with the statute.
OUTCOME: The judgment was reversed, and judgment was rendered in favor of the employer.
