Dorothy Idusuyi VS Earl K. Long Medical Center
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2012 CA 0751 DOROTHYIDUSUYI VERSUS f EARL K LONG MEDICAL CENTER m 7udgment Rendered I 21 2012 DEC On Appeal from the Office of Workers Compensation District 5 In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana No 11 00995 Honorable Jason Ourso Judge Presiding Mark Plaisance Thibodaux Louisiana Counsel for Plaintiff Appellant Dorothy Idusuyi Denise Vinet Baton Rouge Louisiana Brian E Blackwood Baton Counsel for Defendant Appellee Earl K Long Medical Center Rouge Louisiana BEFORE WHIPPLE McCLENDON AND HIGGINBOTHAM J McCLENDON In this workers compensation dispute the claimant Dorothy Idusuyi appeals a judgment of the Office of Workers Compensation OWC that denied her claim for additional disability benefits Ms Idusuyi was involved in a work accident on October 12 2006 while employed by Earl K Long Medical Center EKL While EKL accepted her left knee injury as a compensable workers compensation claim resulting from the work accident it disputed the relatedness of Ms Idusuyi sback shoulder neck left hip hands tunnel syndrome and right knee complaints to the on carpal the job accident Following the presentation of her case at trial which included her testimony and various medical records EKL moved for an involuntary dismissal which was granted Judgment was signed on December 19 2011 and this appeal by Ms Idusuyi followed After a full review of the record before us we affirm the OWC ruling in this memorandum opinion pursuant to the Uniform Rules Louisiana Courts of Appeal Rule 2 16 16 On October 12 2006 Ms Idusuyi an Administrative Coordinator II at EKL was working at her computer when she stood up and heard her left knee pop As a result of the injury Ms Idusuyi underwent three surgeries on her left knee including a partial knee replacement in 2008 She contends that she later developed symptoms in her hands shoulder right knee neck and lower back which she alleges are all related to her work accident Ms Idusuyi argues that the weakness in her left knee caused her to fall and injure her back neck left hip and shoulder She also believes that by favoring her left knee she 1 Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 16726 provides In an action tried by the court without a jury after the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his evidence any party without waiving his right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted may move for a dismissal of the action as to him on the ground that upon the facts and law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief The court may then determine the facts and render judgment against the plaintiff and in favor of the moving party or may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence In determining whether involuntary dismissal should be granted the appropriate standard is whether the plaintiff has presented sufficient evidence on his case to establish his claim chief in by a preponderance of the evidence Robinson v Dunn 96 La 1 Cir il 0341 App 96 8 683 So 894 896 writ denied 96 La 1 687 So 410 2d 2965 97 31 2d An involuntary dismissal should not be reversed by an appellate court in the absence of manifest error Id 2 developed problems with her right knee anc rhat the problem with her hands resulted from the use of crutches and a cane for her left knee In its oral reasons for granting the motion for involuntary dismissal the OWC stated in pertinent part Considering the law the evidence and the argument of counsel the Court has thoroughly reviewed the exhibits submitted with the case and carefully listened to the testimony of the claimant and considering the totality of the evidence including but not limited to the IME report of Dr Thad Broussard wherein he does not relate these conditions asserted by the claimant as being part of her injuries from the accident of October 12 2006 the Court finds the claimant has failed in her burden of proof in proving that these conditions are related to the case Therefore these claims are denied and the case is dismissed with prejudice In her appeal Ms Idusuyi contends that the OWC erred in granting the involuntary dismissal based on an independent medical examination IME She asserts that the OWC gave improper weight to the medical report of the IME doctor who saw Ms Idusuyi on only one occasion rather than to the medical evidence from her ongoing treating physician The same standard of review applicable to factual findings of district courts the manifest error wrong standard is also applicable to factual clearly findings in workers compensation cases Ary v Personal Care 10 2291 App La 1 Cir 6 68 So 1192 1195 writ denied i1 La 11 10 3d 1519 11 7 3d 10 71 So 317 Whether a claimant has carried her burden of proof and whether testimony is credible are questions of fact to be determined by the workers compensation judge Scott v Wal Stores Inc 03 Mart 0858 App La 1 Cir 2 873 So 664 669 04 23 2d For an appellate court to reverse a factual finding in a workers compensation case it must find from the record that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding or that the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong See Stobart v State through Dept of Transp and Development 617 So 880 882 La 1993 The issue to be resolved by the 2d reviewing court is not whether the trier of fact was right or wrong but whether the factfinder conclusion was a reasonable one s 3 Even though an appellate court may feel its own evaluations and inferences are more reasonable than the s factfinder reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review where conflict exists in the testimony Thus where two permissible views of the evidence exist the factfinder schoice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong Id Ary 68 3d So at 1195 Further as a general rule the testimony of a treating physician should be accorded greater weight than that of a physician who examines a patient only once or twice Scott 873 So at 669 2d However the treating physician s testimony is not irrebuttable and the trier of fact is required to weigh the testimony of all medical witnesses An IME medical conclusions should be s given significant weight because the IME is an objective party Nevertheless the opinion of the IME is not conclusive and the OWC must evaluate all of the evidence presented in making a decision as to a claimanYs medical condition Id In this matter the OWC clearly stated that it considered the totality of the evidence Because we find that the OWC factual conclusions are reasonably s supported by the record we find that they are not manifestly erroneous Likewise based on these factual conclusions we find no error in the OWC s judgment that dismissed Ms s Idusuyi claim for additional workers compensation benefits Thus we affirm the December 19 2011 judgment of the OWC Costs of this appeal are assessed against Ms Idusuyi AFFIRMED 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
