Case Name: TOURO INFIRMARY v. Viola JOHNSON, Home Health Services of Louisiana, Inc., and Highlands Insurance Co.
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1979-11-08
Citations: 377 So. 2d 898
Docket Number: No. 10251
Parties: TOURO INFIRMARY v. Viola JOHNSON, Home Health Services of Louisiana, Inc., and Highlands Insurance Co.
Judges: Before SAMUEL, LEMMON and GARRISON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 377
Pages: CMLXXVIII–CMLXXXI

Head Matter:
TOURO INFIRMARY v. Viola JOHNSON, Home Health Services of Louisiana, Inc., and Highlands Insurance Co.
No. 10251.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
Nov. 8, 1979.
Writ Refused Jan. 11, 1980.
Badeaux, Discon, Cumberland & Barbier, J. Michael Cumberland, New Orleans, for defendant and third-party plaintiff appellant.
Christovich & Kearney, William J. Som-mers, Jr., New Orleans, for third-party defendants-appellees.
Before SAMUEL, LEMMON and GARRISON, JJ.

Opinion:
GARRISON, Judge.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment dismissing Viola Johnson's third-party suit against her employer and her employer's worker's compensation insurer. Finding Mrs. Johnson has failed to show any material issue of fact, we affirm.
Viola Johnson suffered an on-the-job injury while working for Home Health Services of Louisiana, Inc. She was admitted to Touro Infirmary for treatment in January and May 1977. Her employer's worker's compensation insurer paid her medical bills up to the $25,000.00 statutory limit. The total expenses incurred, however, were some $6,000.00 more than that limit, and Touro subsequently sued Mrs. Johnson and her husband for payment. The Johnsons third-partied Home Health Services, Inc. and its insurer, Highlands Insurance Co. They alleged that the third-party defendants had made, in effect, a quasi-contractual agreement to pay all Mrs. Johnson's medical expenses arising from her worker's compensation claim. The third-party defendants filed a motion for summary judgment with an affidavit and supporting documents. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Home Health Services and Highlands. The Johnsons have appealed.
Mrs. Johnson's job-related injury occurred on March 28, 1975. At that time, R.S. 23:1203 provided a $25,000.00 limit of liability for medical expenses on worker's compensation claims. Appellant contends that the compensation insurer assumed responsibility for and specifically authorized her admission to Touro, and that these actions made the insurer liable for all costs of her treatment at Touro, regardless of the $25,000.00 limit.
C.C.P.Art. 966 prescribes the following basis for summary judgment: "The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to material fact, and that mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." In ruling on a summary judgment, the court's function is not to determine the merits of the issue raised but rather whether there is a genuine and material factual issue. Chisholm v. Stephens, 231 So.2d 640 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1970). If the mover at the trial of a motion for summary judgment produces convincing proof by affidavits or other receivable evidence of the facts upon which the motion is based, and no counter-affidavits or other receivable evidence are offered by the opposing party to contradict that proof, then the conclusion may be justified that there is no genuine issue as to facts proved, even though allegations to the contrary might be contained in the pleadings. Haley v. City of Opelousas, 374 So.2d 903 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1977).
Here, although Mrs. Johnson alleges that Highlands agreed with Touro to be responsible for all indebtedness arising out of her hospitalization, Highlands' affidavit in support of its motion for summary judgment denies this. The affidavit states that Highlands made total payments of $25,-000.00 to Touro; that when Mrs. Johnson first was admitted to the hospital, Highlands informed Touro that it would be liable for her medical bills up to the statutory limit; that Highlands advised Touro on May 4, 1977 that the statutory limit was $25,000.00 and that this amount had been nearly exhausted by that date. Highlands also attached documents showing the amounts and payees of the funds, and copies of letters to Touro and Mrs. Johnson's physicians advising that the statutory limit was approaching.
Mrs. Johnson's affidavit, on the other hand, simply states that she was admitted to Touro on January 6, 1977 and that she was admitted only after the hospital received specific approval from a Highlands or Home Health Services representative. Despite her allegations in earlier pleadings regarding Highlands' quasi-contractual agreement with Touro, her affidavit failed to controvert Highlands' denial of such an agreement. Accordingly, the uncontrovert-ed affidavits in the record conclusively prove that Highlands Insurance Co. did not make such a blanket authorization. In the absence of such an authorization, Highlands was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
For the reasons above, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
LEMMON, J., concurs and assigns reasons.