Miles v. Burton Roofing

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMarch 3, 2003
DocketI.C. NO. 075750
StatusPublished

This text of Miles v. Burton Roofing (Miles v. Burton Roofing) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Miles v. Burton Roofing, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2003).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the Deputy Commissioner's Opinion and Award based on the record of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner, together with the post-hearing depositions of Robert Burton and Marc Wert, and payroll records. Having reviewed the competent evidence of record, the Full Commission hereby modifies and affirms the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

***********
ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE
In addition to the evidence presented at the deputy commissioner hearing, the Full Commission accepts as evidence in this case the deposition of Robert Burton taken on July 12, 2002, the deposition of Marc Wert taken on June 10, 2002, and the 4 pages of "payroll" information attached to the Defendant-Appellant's Supplemental Brief to the Full Industrial Commission.

***********
Based upon the competent evidence adduced from the record, the Full Commission makes the following

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff's date of birth was October 2, 1969. He completed high school and has obtained his CNA. Since high school, he worked initially in temporary positions, worked for Southern Quilting as a sewer and he has done manual types of work. Plaintiff first received notice of the job he obtained with defendant-employer by way of a newspaper advertisement. When he called to inquire, he spoke to Jeff Childers, who interviewed him and said they were looking for a laborer. Mr. Childers called plaintiff back and offered him a job with defendant as a laborer making $9.00 per hour. Plaintiff usually worked 40 hours per week for defendant.

2. Defendant is in the construction business and has been loosely referred to as "Burton Roofing." Records have been filed indicating that the correct name for the entity that employed plaintiff was "Burton Roofing, Inc., II" which was a Virginia corporation, with Debra Burton listed as the sole shareholder and an officer of the corporation. Robert Burton testified, and the Commission finds as fact, that he is the husband of Debra Burton and that he served, in fact, as a vice-president for Burton Roofing, Inc., II, with authority to contract and manage the business of Burton Roofing, Inc., II. Robert Burton's authority was confirmed by the testimony of Marc Wert, the manager of the local Greensboro office.

3. Burton Roofing, Inc., II's home office is in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Burton Roofing, Inc., II, also maintained and operated an office out of Greensboro, North Carolina. Mr. Childers worked out of the Greensboro office. It was out of the Greensboro office that he hired plaintiff.

4. While plaintiff was employed by defendant-employer, defendant-employer employed approximately nine individuals, sometimes more, out of the Greensboro office, on a regular basis.

5. Plaintiff was paid by the hour for work he did for defendant-employer. The tools, equipment and materials were provided by defendant-employer. Plaintiff was hired by defendant-employer in either January or February 2000, as a laborer.

6. On the morning of September 14, 2000, plaintiff was picked up by defendant at his brother's house along with a co-worker named Orlando, and taken to the job site. It was raining that morning. Plaintiff was instructed to cover the roof they had been working on. The roof was made of metal. As plaintiff stepped on the wet roof, he slipped and started to slide off the roof, but caught himself. When he righted himself, he noticed that his right arm was bleeding. Plaintiff's co-workers assisted him in getting down and placed him in Jeff Childer's truck. Mr. Childer began to drive plaintiff to the hospital, but due to the right arm bleeding, they stopped and were instructed to elevate the arm until an ambulance could arrive. Plaintiff was taken by ambulance to Moses Cone Hospital where he was seen and treated by Dr. Matthew Weingold for injuries he sustained to his right arm. Plaintiff has been unable to get further treatment because his workers' compensation claim was denied and he does not have the resources to pay for the treatment. Plaintiff indicated at the deputy commissioner hearing that he cannot fully open his right hand, and that his ring and small finger remain in a clawed position. He is able to close his hand to make a fist, but cannot exert any pressure in doing so. He cannot hold a hammer or weed eater in his right hand. He has been unsuccessful in locating any work that he is capable of performing since the injury.

7. Plaintiff has incurred medical expenses from treatment he has received as a result of the injury he sustained on September 14, 2000. Defendant has not paid any of plaintiff's medical bills incurred as a result of the injury. Plaintiff's mother has paid for some or all of the prescription medication that plaintiff has required as a result of the injury, but she has not been reimbursed for the treatment.

8. Dr. Weingold has indicated that further treatment is needed to correct or lessen plaintiff's current problems. Plaintiff has not been able to obtain this treatment because he lacks the funds.

9. On September 14, 2000, defendant-employer did not have in force and effect workers' compensation insurance for the State of North Carolina. Burton Roofing, Inc., II, had workers' compensation insurance with Commonwealth Contractors Group Self-Insurance Association for employees domiciled in Virginia. A notice letter sent to "Burton Roofing, II, Inc." on March 30, 2000, stated:

"We would like to remind you that this coverage is for work performed within the State of Virginia. You will be covered for incidental work out-of-state if needed, but keep in mind that all such work should be performed by Virginia domiciled employees. Also, should a claim occur in another state, the claim must be filed in Virginia as we can only pay Virginia benefits. The best solution would be to obtain insurance in the state where you perform the work thereby assuring that your claim will be fully covered."

Plaintiff was not and is not a Virginia resident and was not working in Virginia at the time and place of his injury. Plaintiff is a resident of North Carolina and was injured while working in North Carolina. Therefore, the Commonwealth Contractors Group Self-Insurance Association policy does not afford coverage for plaintiff's injury. Burton Roofing, Inc., II did not have workers' compensation insurance in North Carolina on plaintiff's date of injury.

10. Subsequent to plaintiff's injury, Burton Roofing, Inc. II, ceased activity because of tax liens. The operations of Burton Roofing, Inc., II, was then carried on under the name of BLB Renovations. All evidence suggests, and the Commission so finds, that BLB Renovations continued the prior operations of Burton Roofing, Inc., II, including completion of the work, use of the same Greensboro, N.C., office, employment of the same employees, and use of the same trucks, equipment, and materials. The Commission finds that BLB Renovations is the alter ego and successor to Burton Roofing, Inc., II.

11. Burton Roofing, Inc., was a business that Robert Burton operated from 1989 to 1991, before he married his current wife, Debra Burton, and therefore, was not plaintiff's employer and is not liable for this claim.

12. Robert Burton testified that his wife, Debra Burton, was responsible for securing and maintaining workers' compensation insurance for Burton Roofing, Inc., II. Although Robert Burton testified that his wife, Debra Burton, owned and operated Burton Roofing, Inc., II, on at least two occasions he testified that he either was, or in fact acted as, the vice president of the corporation.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Miles v. Burton Roofing, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miles-v-burton-roofing-ncworkcompcom-2003.