JOHN W. SMITH v. HIGHLINES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Supreme Court of Louisiana FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #046 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 22nd day of September, 2017, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2016-C-1443 JOHN W. SMITH v. HIGHLINES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY In light of our opinion in Burgess v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, 16-2267 (La. 6/29/17), ___ So. 3d ___, the judgment of the court of appeal is vacated and set aside insofar as it finds claimant was not entitled to reimbursement. The case is remanded to the Office of Workers’ Compensation for a determination, consistent with the interpretation of La. R.S. 23:1203(A) set forth in Burgess, of whether the out-of-state pharmacy’s services were not available in Louisiana or whether the out-of-state pharmacy can provide services for comparable costs to those of a Louisiana pharmacy. In all other respects, the judgment of the court of appeal is affirmed. WEIMER, J., dissents and assigns reasons. GENOVESE, J., concurs in the result and assigns reasons. 9/22/17 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 2016-C-1443 JOHN W. SMITH VERSUS HIGHLINES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND CIRCUIT, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION DISTRICT 1E PER CURIAM In light of our opinion in Burgess v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, 16-2267 (La. 6/29/17), ___ So. 3d ___, the judgment of the court of appeal is vacated and set aside insofar as it finds claimant was not entitled to reimbursement. The case is remanded to the Office of Workers’ Compensation for a determination, consistent with the interpretation of La. R.S. 23:1203(A) set forth in Burgess, of whether the out-of-state pharmacy’s services were not available in Louisiana or whether the out-of-state pharmacy can provide services for comparable costs to those of a Louisiana pharmacy. In all other respects, the judgment of the court of appeal is affirmed. 09/22/17 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 2016-C-1443 JOHN W. SMITH VERSUS HIGHLINES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Office of Workers’ Compensation District 1E WEIMER, J., dissenting. Having granted the writ of certiorari in this matter, I would issue a full opinion based upon the record before this court. 09/22/17 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 2016-C-1443 JOHN W. SMITH VERSUS HIGHLINES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. AND THE GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND CIRCUIT, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION DISTRICT 1E GENOVESE, J., concurs in the result and assigns reasons. I concur with the majority’s remand only to the extent of having the Office of Worker’s Compensation determine whether the out-of-state pharmacy services were not available in Louisiana or whether the out-of-state pharmacy can provide services for comparable costs to those of a Louisiana pharmacy. In all other respects, and particularly with respect to the issue of choice of pharmacy in a worker’s compensation case, I maintain the position which I previously articulated in my dissent in Burgess v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, 16-2268 (La. 6/29/17), __ So.3d __, that the choice of pharmacy does not necessarily rest with the employer.
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.
