La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103 (2026)

Damages; apportionment of between employer and employee in suits against third persons; compromise of claims; credit

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§1103. Damages; apportionment of between employer and employee in suits against third persons; compromise of claims; credit

           A.(1) In the event that the employer or the employee or his dependent becomes party plaintiff in a suit against a third person, as provided in R.S. 23:1102, and damages are recovered, such damages shall be so apportioned in the judgment that the claim of the employer for the compensation actually paid shall take precedence over that of the injured employee or his dependent; and if the damages are not sufficient or are sufficient only to reimburse the employer for the compensation which he has actually paid, such damages shall be assessed solely in his favor; but if the damages are more than sufficient to so reimburse the employer, the excess shall be assessed in favor of the injured employee or his dependent, and upon payment thereof to the employee or his dependent, the liability of the employer for compensation shall cease for such part of the compensation due, computed at six percent per annum, and shall be satisfied by such payment. The employer's credit against its future compensation obligation shall be reduced by the amount of attorney fees and court costs paid by the employee in the third party suit.

           (2) No compromise with such third person by either the employer or the injured employee or his dependent shall be binding upon or affect the rights of the others unless assented to by him.

           (3) Any dispute between the employer and the employee regarding the calculation of the employer's credit may be filed with the office of workers' compensation and tried before a workers' compensation judge. If a third party action has been filed in a district court, such dispute shall be filed in the district court and tried before a district judge unless the parties agree otherwise. However, any determination of the employer's credit shall not affect any rights granted to the employer or the employee pursuant to R.S. 23:1103(C).

           B. The claim of the employer shall be satisfied in the manner described above from the first dollar of the judgment without regard to how the damages have been itemized or classified by the judge or jury. Such first dollar satisfaction shall be paid from the entire judgment, regardless of whether the judgment includes compensation for losses other than medical expenses and lost wages.

           C.(1) If either the employer or employee intervenes in the third party suit filed by the other, the intervenor shall only be responsible for a share of the reasonable legal fees and costs incurred by the attorney retained by the plaintiff, which portion shall not exceed one-third of the intervenor's recovery for prejudgment payments or prejudgment damages. The amount of the portion of attorney fees shall be determined by the district court based on the proportionate services of the attorneys which benefitted or augmented the recovery from the third party. The employee as intervenor shall not be responsible for the employer's attorney fees attributable to postjudgment damages nor will the employer as intervenor be responsible for the attorney fees attributable to the credit given to the employer under Subsection A of this Section. Costs shall include taxable court costs as well as the fees of experts retained by the plaintiff. The pro rata share of the intervenor's costs shall be based on intervenor's recovery of prejudgment payments or prejudgment damages.

           (2) When recovery of damages from a third party is made without filing of a suit, the employer shall be responsible for an amount, not to exceed one-third of his recovery on pre-compromise payments, for reasonable legal fees and costs incurred by the attorney retained by the employee or his dependent in pursuit of the third party matter. The responsibility for payment of this amount shall exist only if there is written approval of the compromise by the employer, his compensation carrier, or the compensation payor.

           D. An insurer shall grant its insured a dollar-for-dollar credit for any amount on any claim paid pursuant to this Chapter on the employer's behalf and recovered in the current year, less any reasonable expenses incurred in the recovery by the insurer, in an action or compromise pursuant to this Section and R.S. 23:1102. The credit shall be used by the insurer in the calculation of the loss experience modifier promulgated by and in accordance with the rules of the National Council on Compensation Insurance, to be applied in determining the annual premium paid by the employer for workers' compensation insurance under this Chapter. The group self-insurance fund shall apply the loss experience modifier authorized by R.S. 23:1196.

           Amended by Acts 1958, No. 109, §1; Acts 1989, No. 454, §4, eff. Jan. 1, 1990; Acts 1997, No. 53, §1; Acts 1997, No. 59, §1; Acts 1997, No. 1354, §1, eff. July 15, 1997; Acts 2016, No. 470, §1, eff. August 1, 2016.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 221 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1952–2025 · leading case: St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 809 (La. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 809 (La. 1992). · cites it 30× “This case raises the question of whether the 1989 amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1103, effective January 1, 1990, granting an employer first payment for worker's compensation paid out of any damages recovered by the employee from a third party, regardless of how the damages are…”
City of DeQuincy v. Henry, 62 So. 3d 43 (La. 2011). · cites it 18× “Henry admits in *48 brief, by their very terms, Section 23:1102 applies IfiOnly to situations involving the settlement of a third-party tort claim, whether or not suit was filed, while Section 23:1103 applies to those cases which are actually tried to judgment.”
Degruise v. Houma Courier Newspaper Corp., 815 So. 2d 1074 (La. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 25× “[2] SLECA and Federated, in its capacity as SLECA's workers' compensation insurer, intervened seeking reimbursement for amounts previously paid to Degruise in workers' compensation benefits and a declaration of a future credit pursuant to LSA-R.S. 23:1103. [3] Accordingly,…”
Roadrunner Motor Rebuilders, Inc. v. Ryan, 603 So. 2d 214 (La. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 18× “Thereafter, the trial judge, interpreting the language of LSA-R.S. 23:1103, determined that the employer and the worker's compensation carrier were entitled to the funds deposited in the concursus proceeding.”
Crowley v. City of Lafayette, 602 So. 2d 40 (La. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 22× “R.S. 23:1103 RETROACTIVE OR PROSPECTIVE? Prior to amendment, La.”
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 809 (La. 1992). · cites it 30× “This case raises the question of whether the 1989 amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1103, effective January 1, 1990, granting an employer first payment for worker’s compensation paid out of any damages recovered by the employee from a third party, regardless of how the damages are…”
Degruise v. Houma Courier Newspaper Corp., 683 So. 2d 689 (La. 1996). · cites it 7× “I just have a hard time in my mind justifying giving them, or giving to plaintiffs' counsel, another award of attorneys' fees because they also intervened as the workmens compensation carrier. Plaintiffs appealed this ruling.”
Moody v. Arabie, 498 So. 2d 1081 (La. 1986). · cites it 3× “R.S. 23:1103. When an excess in damages is paid to the worker the employer is entitled to a credit of such amount against compensation it will become obligated to pay in the future.”
Segura v. Frank, 630 So. 2d 714 (La. 1994). · cites it 2× “R.S. 23:1103(B) of the Louisiana Worker's Compensation Law was interpretive or substantive.”
Fontenot v. Hanover Ins. Co., 385 So. 2d 238 (La. 1980). · cites it 4× “; (3) the employer or employee is obliged to give notice to the other of filing of such a suit, La.”
Jaffarzad v. Jones Truck Lines, Inc., 561 So. 2d 144 (La. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 3× “R.S. 23:1103 provides in pertinent part: "In the event that the employer or the employee or his dependent becomes party plaintiff in a suit against a third person, as provided in R.”
Faught v. Ryder/p I E Nationwide, Inc., 543 So. 2d 918 (La. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 5× “LSA-R.S. 23:1103 grants preference for reimbursement of compensation benefits to an intervening employer in the tort suit that ends in a judgment against a third person tort-feasor.”
Show all 221 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(0): 1 case
Reichenpfader v. Paccar, Inc., 872 F. Supp. 328 (E.D. La. 1994).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(2): 1 case
Bolton v. Tulane Univ., 755 So. 2d 1003 (La. Ct. App. 2000).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(A): 11 cases
Crowley v. City of Lafayette, 602 So. 2d 40 (La. Ct. App. 1992). “R.S. 23:1103 RETROACTIVE OR PROSPECTIVE? Prior to amendment, La.”
Degruise v. Houma Courier Newspaper Corp., 815 So. 2d 1074 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “[2] SLECA and Federated, in its capacity as SLECA's workers' compensation insurer, intervened seeking reimbursement for amounts previously paid to Degruise in workers' compensation benefits and a declaration of a future credit pursuant to LSA-R.S. 23:1103. [3] Accordingly,…”
Tommie's Novelty v. Velasco, 868 So. 2d 962 (La. Ct. App. 2004).
Bergeron v. Williams, 764 So. 2d 1084 (La. Ct. App. 2000).
Burns v. Apache Corp., 853 So. 2d 708 (La. Ct. App. 2003).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(A)(1): 18 cases
Degruise v. Houma Courier Newspaper Corp., 815 So. 2d 1074 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “[2] SLECA and Federated, in its capacity as SLECA's workers' compensation insurer, intervened seeking reimbursement for amounts previously paid to Degruise in workers' compensation benefits and a declaration of a future credit pursuant to LSA-R.S. 23:1103. [3] Accordingly,…”
Marquez v. Progressive Ins. Co., 944 So. 2d 876 (La. Ct. App. 2006).
Landry v. Martin Mills, Inc., 737 So. 2d 58 (La. Ct. App. 1999).
Allstate Indem. Co. v. Knighten, 705 So. 2d 240 (La. Ct. App. 1997).
Rambin v. Shreveport Refrigeration, Inc., 902 So. 2d 1129 (La. Ct. App. 2005).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(A)(2): 4 cases
Nicholes v. St. Helena Par. Police Jury, 604 So. 2d 1023 (La. Ct. App. 1992).
Penton v. Castellano, 169 So. 3d 739 (La. Ct. App. 2015).
Ledet ex rel. Ledet v. Robinson Helicopter Co., 195 So. 3d 95 (La. Ct. App. 2016).
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Bethard, 625 So. 2d 360 (La. Ct. App. 1993).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(A)(3): 1 case
Smith v. W. World Ins. Co., 134 So. 3d 1198 (La. Ct. App. 2014).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(B): 15 cases
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 809 (La. 1992). “This case raises the question of whether the 1989 amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1103, effective January 1, 1990, granting an employer first payment for worker's compensation paid out of any damages recovered by the employee from a third party, regardless of how the damages are…”
Segura v. Frank, 630 So. 2d 714 (La. 1994). “R.S. 23:1103(B) of the Louisiana Worker's Compensation Law was interpretive or substantive.”
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 809 (La. 1992). “This case raises the question of whether the 1989 amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1103, effective January 1, 1990, granting an employer first payment for worker’s compensation paid out of any damages recovered by the employee from a third party, regardless of how the damages are…”
Marquez v. Progressive Ins. Co., 944 So. 2d 876 (La. Ct. App. 2006).
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 596 So. 2d 272 (La. Ct. App. 1992).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(C): 25 cases
Degruise v. Houma Courier Newspaper Corp., 815 So. 2d 1074 (La. Ct. App. 2002). “[2] SLECA and Federated, in its capacity as SLECA's workers' compensation insurer, intervened seeking reimbursement for amounts previously paid to Degruise in workers' compensation benefits and a declaration of a future credit pursuant to LSA-R.S. 23:1103. [3] Accordingly,…”
Norris v. Goeders, 652 So. 2d 144 (La. Ct. App. 1995).
City of DeQuincy v. Henry, 62 So. 3d 43 (La. 2011). “Henry admits in *48 brief, by their very terms, Section 23:1102 applies IfiOnly to situations involving the settlement of a third-party tort claim, whether or not suit was filed, while Section 23:1103 applies to those cases which are actually tried to judgment.”
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 809 (La. 1992). “This case raises the question of whether the 1989 amendment to LSA-R.S. 23:1103, effective January 1, 1990, granting an employer first payment for worker's compensation paid out of any damages recovered by the employee from a third party, regardless of how the damages are…”
Jaffarzad v. Jones Truck Lines, Inc., 561 So. 2d 144 (La. Ct. App. 1990). “R.S. 23:1103 provides in pertinent part: "In the event that the employer or the employee or his dependent becomes party plaintiff in a suit against a third person, as provided in R.”
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(C)(1): 8 cases
Johnson v. Orleans Par. Sch. Bd., 932 So. 2d 687 (La. Ct. App. 2006).
Tommie's Novelty v. Velasco, 923 So. 2d 936 (La. Ct. App. 2006).
St. Tammany Par. Sch. Bd. v. Bullinger, 168 So. 3d 493 (La. Ct. App. 2014).
Tolbird v. Wyble, 892 So. 2d 103 (La. Ct. App. 2004).
Kenly v. Fuller, 69 So. 3d 1285 (La. Ct. App. 2011).
La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1103(D): 1 case
Madden Gulf Coast LLC v. Hilark Indus., Inc., No. 2:24-cv-02233 (E.D. La. May 23, 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.