Bacallao, Amalia v. Javier H. Sanabria DBA Custom Cleaning Service , 2021 TN WC 149 ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
    IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS
    AT COOKEVILLE
    Amalia Bacallao, ) Docket Nos.: 2019-04-0203A
    Employee, ) 2019-04-0203B
    v. ) 2019-04-0203C
    Javier H. Sanabria DBA Custom)
    Cleaning Service, )
    Respondent, ) State File Nos.: 51633-2019
    And ) 27508-2020
    AmGuard Ins. Co., ) 27484-2020
    Respondent, )
    And )
    Victoriano C. Jutzuy, ) Judge Robert Durham
    Respondent, )
    And )
    United Painting Services, Inc., )
    Respondent, )
    And )
    Auto Owners Ins. Co., )
    Respondent. )
    COMPENSATION ORDER GRANTING AMGUARD’S
    MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
    The Court held a hearing on February 16, 2021, on AmGuard’s Motion for
    Summary Judgment on the grounds that it is not contractually obligated to provide
    coverage for claims filed in Tennessee. None of the parties contested AmGuard’s motion;
    however, the Court asked AmGuard to file a supplemental brief as to the enforceability of
    the stated policy provision. After reviewing the record, the Court holds that AmGuard is
    entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
    History of Claim
    Based on the Statement of Undisputed Facts, Amalia Bacallao, the injured
    employee and a Tennessee resident, entered into a contract with Victoriano Jutzuy in
    Tennessee to paint the new fitness center at Tennessee Tech in Cookeville.' During an
    Expedited Hearing, she also asserted that Mr. Jutzuy had contracted with Mr. Sanabria in
    North Carolina to paint the fitness center, and that Mr. Sanabria had subcontracted the job
    from United Painting Services. AmGuard provided workers’ compensation insurance for
    Mr. Sanabria, but the contract limited coverage to injuries 1n North Carolina.
    After the Expedited Hearing, the Court held that Ms. Bacallao would likely prove
    at trial that she suffered a compensable back injury while working for Mr. Jutzuy;
    however, she did not provide sufficient evidence of a subcontractor relationship between
    Mr. Jutzuy and Mr. Sanabria.
    In this motion, AmGuard contends that even if Ms. Bacallao were successful in
    linking her employment to Mr. Sanabria, it would nevertheless be entitled to judgment as
    a matter of law because the policy it issued to Mr. Sanabria contained the following
    language:
    The employee claiming benefits was either hired under a contract of
    employment made in a state listed in Item 3.A. of the Information Page or
    was, at the time of injury, principally employed in a state listed in Item 3.A.
    of the Information Page; and b. The employee claiming benefits is not
    claiming benefits in a state where, at the time of injury, (4) you have other
    workers compensation insurance coverage, or (ii) you were, by virtue of the
    nature of your operations in that state, required by that state’s law to have
    obtained separate workers compensation insurance coverage, or (111) you are
    an authorized self-insurer or participant in a self-insured group plan; and c.
    The duration of the work being performed by the employee claiming
    benefits in the state for which that employee is claiming benefits is
    temporary.
    AmGuard contended Ms. Bacallao was hired by Mr. Jutzuy in Tennessee and that
    she was injured in Tennessee. It further contended that Mr. Sanabria did not have
    workers’ compensation insurance coverage in Tennessee. Thus, AmGuard argued that
    Ms. Bacallao’s injury did not satisfy the requirements for coverage under the policy.
    Law and Analysis
    To prevail on a motion for summary judgment, a party must (1) submit affirmative
    evidence that negates an essential element of the nonmoving party’s claim; or (2)
    demonstrate that the nonmoving party’s evidence is insufficient to establish an essential
    element of the nonmoving party’s claim. Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-16-101 (2020).
    "Mr. Jutzuy did not carry workers’ compensation insurance.
    2
    Here, none of the parties opposed the motion. Thus, the Court turns to whether the
    policy provision at issue allows entry of summary judgment in favor of AmGuard.
    In that regard, it is undisputed that Ms. Bacallao could not satisfy the first element
    of the policy and receive any benefits under it because the contract of hire was made in
    Tennessee and the injury occurred here. Likewise, it is undisputed that Mr. Sanabria did
    not obtain a workers’ compensation insurance policy covering Tennessee claims.
    However, the issue is whether the exemption itself is enforceable under workers’
    compensation law, thus making summary judgment in favor of AmGuard appropriate.
    AmGuard concedes that it could not find any case interpreting this provision under
    Tennessee law. However, it did cite cases from other states that have considered policy
    provisions limiting coverage to certain states. See, e.g. Matter of Chmura v. T&J Painting
    Co., 
    83 A.D.3d 1193
    (NY App. Div. 2011); Granite State Ins. Co. v. Hernandez, 
    992 A.2d 528
    (Md. Ct. of App. 2010) (the opinion also reviewed several other decisions considering
    this issue). Although the facts differ in each case, the general holding is that the exclusion
    is enforceable so long as the intent is clear: the carrier is not responsible for payment of
    benefits under the law of the state where the worker was injured unless all of the elements
    of the exemption are met. Although these decisions are not binding on the Court, they are
    persuasive.
    Given the undisputed facts, the Court holds that AmGuard is entitled to summary
    judgment as a matter of law and is not liable for providing workers’ compensation benefits
    to Ms. Bacallao under the stated policy provision.
    IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED:
    1. AmGuard’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is granted, and it is dismissed
    with prejudice.
    2. Unless appealed, this Order shall become final in thirty days.
    ENTERED February 24, 2021.
    Robert V. Durham, Judge
    Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I certify that a copy of this order was sent as indicated on February 24, 2021.
    Name Certified | Via Via_ | Service sent to:
    Mail Fax Email
    Amalia Baccallao x x 378 W. Stevens Street, Apt. D
    Cookeville, TN 38501
    mayabacallao@hotmail.com
    Javier S. Sanabria xX 5663 Silver Bell Lane
    Granite Falls, NC 28630
    Victoriano C. Jutzuy x 1657 East Crest Drive, Apt. M5
    Charlotte, N.C. 28205
    Allen Callison xX Allen.callison@megclaw.com
    Michael Haynie x mhaynie@manierherod.com
    Uninsured Employers X | Lashawn.pender@tn.gov
    Fund
    f/f
    f
    co
    he
    | /
    dw
    Penny Shrumy, Clerk
    Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
    WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov
    Compensation Hearing Order Right to Appeal:
    If you disagree with this Compensation Hearing Order, you may appeal to the Workers’
    Compensation Appeals Board or the Tennessee Supreme Court. To appeal to the Workers’
    Compensation Appeals Board, you must:
    1. Complete the enclosed form entitled: “Notice of Appeal,” and file the form with the
    Clerk of the Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims within thirty calendar days of the
    date the compensation hearing order was filed. When filing the Notice of Appeal, you
    must serve a copy upon the opposing party (or attorney, if represented).
    2. You must pay, via check, money order, or credit card, a $75.00 filing fee within ten
    calendar days after filing of the Notice of Appeal. Payments can be made in-person at
    any Bureau office or by U.S. mail, hand-delivery, or other delivery service. In the
    altemative, you may file an Affidavit of Indigency (form available on the Bureau’s
    website or any Bureau office) seeking a waiver of the filing fee. You must file the fully-
    completed Affidavit of Indigency within ten calendar days of filing the Notice of
    Appeal. Failure to timely pay the filing fee or file the Affidavit of Indigency will
    result in dismissal of your appeal.
    3. You bear the responsibility of ensuring a complete record on appeal. You may request
    from the court clerk the audio recording of the hearing for a $25.00 fee. A licensed court
    reporter must prepare a transcript and file it with the court clerk within fifteen calendar
    days of the filing the Notice of Appeal. Alternatively, you may file a statement of the
    evidence prepared jointly by both parties within fifieen calendar days of the filing of the
    Notice of Appeal. The statement of the evidence must convey a complete and accurate
    account of the hearing. The Workers’ Compensation Judge must approve the statement
    of the evidence before the record is submitted to the Appeals Board. If the Appeals
    Board is called upon to review testimony or other proof concerning factual matters, the
    absence of a transcript or statement of the evidence can be a significant obstacle to
    meaningful appellate review.
    4. After the Workers’ Compensation Judge approves the record and the court clerk transmits
    it to the Appeals Board, a docketing notice will be sent to the parties. The appealing
    party has fifteen calendar days after the date of that notice to submit a brief to the
    Appeals Board. See the Practices and Procedures of the Workers’ Compensation
    Appeals Board.
    To appeal your case directly to the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Compensation Hearing
    Order must be final and you must comply with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate
    Procedure. If neither party timely files an appeal with the Appeals Board, the trial court’s
    Order will become final by operation of law thirty calendar days after entry. See Tenn.
    Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(7).
    For self-represented litigants: Help from an Ombudsman is available at 800-332-2667.
    NOTICE OF APPEAL
    Tennessee Bureau of Workers’ Compensation
    www.tn.gov/workforce/injuries-at-work/
    wc.courtclerk@tn.gov | 1-800-332-2667
    Docket No.:
    State File No.:
    Date of Injury:
    Employee
    Employer
    Notice is given that
    [List name(s) of all appealing party(ies). Use separate sheet if necessary.]
    appeals the following order(s) of the Tennessee Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims to the
    Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (check one or more applicable boxes and include the date file-
    stamped on the first page of the order(s) being appealed):
    CZ Expedited Hearing Order filed on CD Motion Order filed on
    C1 Compensation Order filed on Oi Other Order filed on
    issued by Judge
    Statement of the Issues on Appeal
    Provide a short and plain statement of the issues on appeal or basis for relief on appeal:
    Parties
    Appellant(s) (Requesting Party): [o Employerl | Employee
    Address: Phone:
    Email:
    Attorney’s Name: BPR#:
    Attorney’s Email: Phone:
    Attorney’s Address:
    * Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellant *
    LB-1099 rev. 01/20 Page 1 of 2 RDA 11082
    Employee Name: Docket No.: Date of Inj.:
    Appellee(s) (Opposing Party): [| Employer [Employee
    Appellee’s Address: Phone:
    Email:
    Attorney’s Name: BPR#:
    Attorney’s Email: Phone:
    Attorney’s Address:
    * Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellee *
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I, , certify that | have forwarded a
    true and exact copy of this Notice of Appeal by First Class mail, postage prepaid, or in any manner as described
    in Tennessee Compilation Rules & Regulations, Chapter 0800-02-21, to all parties and/or their attorneys in this
    case on this the day of , 20
    [Signature of appellant or attorney for appellant]
    LB-1099 rev. 01/20 Page 2 of 2 RDA 11082
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2019-04-0203A, 2019-04-0203B, 2019-04-0203C

Citation Numbers: 2021 TN WC 149

Judges: Robert Durham

Filed Date: 2/24/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/2/2021