I know that it’s usually good not to spill your secrets- but in this case it proved to be a mistake that a claimant had not disclosed his previous work related accidents- because he did not receive comp for a subsequent injury.

Christopher Morris worked for Textron Marine and Land Systems as a maintenance mechanic. He claimed that he injured his shoulder in August of 2010 as he was pushing a drum across some grates. He said that he had been receiving benefits but they had been cut in June of 2011. There was an ongoing dispute about those benefits and vocational rehab benefits, so he filed a claim again for comp in June of 2012.

Textron said that though he was injured, he had no need for rehab. They claimed he was able to return to work right away without any further treatment or restrictions and he had done so, earning 90 percent of his normal wages. They said that Morris had violated La. R.S. 23:1208- a statue that was meant to prevent workers’ comp fraud and discouraged any false statements made to collect workers’ comp benefits. They said he had lied about being injured and receiving workers’ comp in several incidents before his injury at Textron. They asked that he pay back all his benefits, and asked for a reimbursement of attorney fees and costs in his case.

Textron said that in October of 2012 Morris testified that he had never been involved in a work related accident before his injury at Textron, or had ever been involved in any kind of motor vehicle accident that might contribute to his shoulder injury, and had never hurt his shoulder or neck, or had never filed a lawsuit before this case. They claimed this was a violation of La. R.S. 23:1208 because investigators found that he had indeed been injured in a car accident in 1997 and hurt his back, neck, shoulders, and legs. Since he was working as a plumber at the time of his accident and was on the job he also received workers’ comp benefits for that accident. He was injured in another work related accident in 1996 and had been involved in another car accident in January of 2012.

The court sided with Textron, saying that while it was possible to forget some things as time went on (some of the injuries are now over 15 years old), that denying all these prior injuries and accidents is “more than just forgetting”. His false statements mean that his benefits will be revoked, and now the burden of proof shifted to him to dispute the fact that he gave the court false statements. All he could provide the court was evidence that he had taken Lortab medication on the day of his deposition and that his memory was affected because of the medication. Yet on the day of his deposition there was a question about whether there was anything that might affect his memory of these events, but he answered there was not anything that might affect his answers. The court did not find his evidence substantial.