By: Michael Parker
The issue of whether someone injured in Texas (or any other state) can assert a claim under the Louisiana Compensation Act (Act) is one that occurs very frequently and as our society continues to be more and more mobile with work duties taking employees to many unexpected places this issue will continue to be something you have to address.
The Act has a specific provision that addresses this issue but its application to a specific set of circumstances can sometimes be quite confusing. In a normal case, an employee is working for an employer in Louisiana and gets hurt in Louisiana. There is no doubt that Louisiana courts would have jurisdiction over this claim. But what if that same employee is hurt while in Texas even though he lives in Louisiana.
The Act provides for extraterritorial (lawyerese for something happening outside of Louisiana) jurisdiction under two scenarios (see 23:1035.1). Meaning that the claimant can assert a claim for benefits under Louisiana law and litigate his entitlement to benefits in Louisiana Courts. The first instance where the claimant would be entitled to benefits under Louisiana law would be if his work is principally localized in Louisiana. An example of this would be if I was in Dallas taking a deposition and was involved in a car wreck and injured. Since my office is in Louisiana and I was just in Texas temporarily for my work, I would be entitled to Louisiana benefits. There is generally not much question about where a person’s work is principally located and there is not much litigation on this part of the Act.
The second and more litigated scenario is where the worker is hired under a contract of hire made in Louisiana but injured in another State. With recruiting companies advertising on the internet and interviews taking place by zoom, it is often difficult to answer the question of at what point the claimant was “hired”. The jurisprudence likes to discuss the “intent of the parties” but in reality, no one is thinking about where the contract of hire was made, the recruiter is trying to fill a position, and the potential employee is looking for a job.
There are several things you should be looking for if this situation presents itself in one of your cases. Was the job offer contingent on the claimant passing a physical? If so, where did the physical take place? If the examination took place in Texas, then you have a good case that the contract of hire was not completed until after the physical. The same is true for pre-employment drug tests. Where was the drug test performed? We see this situation in the context of trucking companies hiring drivers. The recruiter will make contact with a potential hire and conduct an interview over the phone. But the potential hire still has to pass a physical, drug screen and sometimes a driving test which is often done at a terminal in another state. The truck driver returns home with his new job but then has an accident in Mississippi and thinks he is entitled to Louisiana benefits just because he lives in Louisiana. Just because the claimant lives in Louisiana does not mean he is entitled to benefits under the Louisiana Compensation Act. He must show his work was principally localized in Louisiana, which for over the road truck driver is not likely, or he was hired under a contract of hire made in Louisiana.
When you have a claim where the injured employee lives in Louisiana, but the accident happened in another state, start asking questions in your initial interview about the hiring process. Speak to your employer and get the details of what was required before the claimant was hired and get those records. Many attorneys like to keep the claim in Louisiana due to employee choice of physician rule and penalties and attorney fees. It can often be in the best interest of the employer to stay out of Louisiana courts.
As always, when you have questions please contact your lawyer for specific advice.
