Ole J Melkersen v. New Market MetalCraft,etc
This text of Ole J Melkersen v. New Market MetalCraft,etc (Ole J Melkersen v. New Market MetalCraft,etc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Willis, Bray and Annunziata Argued at Alexandria, Virginia
OLE J. MELKERSEN MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY v. Record No. 0236-02-4 JUDGE JERE M. H. WILLIS, JR. AUGUST 6, 2002 NEW MARKET METALCRAFT, INC. AND PENNSYLVANIA NATIONAL MUTUAL CASUALTY INSURANCE
FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
(Ole J. Melkersen, pro se, on brief). Appellant submitting on brief.
Jesse F. Narron (Taylor & Walker, P.C., on brief), for appellees.
Ole Melkersen appeals a decision of the Workers'
Compensation Commission denying him benefits for an injury to
his back, sustained in the course of his employment. Melkersen
contends that the commission erred (1) in finding that he was
the sole proprietor of New Market MetalCraft, Inc. ("employer"),
and (2) in holding that Code § 65.2-101 required him to give
direct notice of his injury to the employer's insurance carrier,
Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance ("insurer"). We
affirm the decision of the commission.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. I. BACKGROUND
A. THE INJURY
Melkersen was the president of New Market MetalCraft, Inc.
and was engaged in the normal day to day activities of the
business. On December 13, 1997, he attempted to mount the first
step of a forklift in order to unload a shipment of steel. As
he began to step up, he twisted his lower back and immediately
felt a sharp pain. By December 18, 1997, the pain was worse.
Melkersen sought medical treatment from Dr. Thomas Peck, a
chiropractor. Dr. Peck referred him to Dr. Glenn Deputy.
Dr. Deputy ordered an MRI scan and determined that Melkersen had
a herniated disk in his spinal column. Dr. Deputy referred
Melkersen to a neurosurgeon, Dr. Ritchie Gillespie, who informed
him in July 1999, that surgery might be required.
B. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On December 13, 1997, the same day of the accident,
Melkersen informed his wife, Gail Melkersen, who was the
employer's bookkeeper and vice-president, that he had injured
his back. Her duties included taking and processing worker's
compensation claims. She completed an employer's first report
of accident form, but did not file it with the Workers'
Compensation Commission ("commission") until July 14, 1999. On
December 3, 1999, Melkersen filed with the commission an
application for hearing, seeking compensation from the employer
and its insurer. - 2 - At the hearing, Melkersen testified, in part, as follows:
Q [Dep. Commissioner Culbreth]: Were you the owner of New Market Metalcraft?
A [Melkersen]: Yes, yes. Yeah, I was self-employed. We had about eight employees.
Q: What was your job at New Market Metalcraft?
A: Manager.
On June 8, 2001, the deputy commissioner issued a written
opinion denying Melkersen's claim. He ruled that Melkersen had
sustained a compensable injury by accident arising out of his
employment, but had failed to give notice of his injury as
required by Code § 65.2-101. He did not specifically find that
Melkersen was a partner or sole proprietor. All parties sought
review by the full commission.
Melkersen contended on review that he was not required to
give notice of his injury directly to the insurer. He tendered
evidence that the employer is a corporation. The commission
rejected this evidence, citing Rule 3:3 of the Rules of the
Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission. Melkersen further
contended that he had proven a reasonable excuse for any
inadequate notice.
The employer and insurer contended on review that Melkersen
had not sustained a compensable injury by accident arising out
of his employment.
- 3 - The full commission affirmed the deputy commissioner's
ruling that Code § 65.2-101 required Melkersen to give notice of
his injury directly to the insurer. "Based on the evidence in
the record" it found that Melkersen was a sole proprietor and
was required by Code § 65.2-101 "Employee" (1)(n) to give timely
notice of his claim directly to the insurer. It held that he
had failed to do so without reasonable excuse. It did not
address whether Melkersen had sustained a compensable injury
arising out of his employment.
II. ANALYSIS
On appeal, "[d]ecisions of the commission as to questions
of fact, if supported by credible evidence, are conclusive and
binding on this Court." Manassas Ice & Fuel Co. v. Federated
Mutual Ins. Co., 13 Va. App. 227, 229, 409 S.E.2d 824, 826
(1991). "The fact that contrary evidence may be found in the
record is of no consequence if credible evidence supports the
commission's finding." Id. We view the evidence in the light
most favorable to the party prevailing below. Creedle Sales Co.
v. Edmonds, 24 Va. App. 24, 26, 480 S.E.2d 123, 124 (1997).
However, "[t]his Court is not bound by the legal determinations
made by the commission." Robinson v. Salvation Army, 20
Va. App. 570, 572, 459 S.E.2d 103, 104 (1995).
Code § 65.2-101 "Employee" (1)(n) defines, in pertinent
part, the term "employee" to include:
- 4 - Any sole proprietor or all partners of a business electing to be included as an employee under the worker's compensation coverage of such business . . . .
When any partner or proprietor is entitled to receive coverage under this title, such person shall be subject to all provisions of this title as if he were an employee; however, the notices required under §§ 65.2-405 and 65.2-600 of this title shall be given to the insurance carrier . . . .
The commission had before it no evidence that New Market
MetalCraft, Inc. was anything but a sole proprietorship. It
properly rejected Melkersen's evidentiary proffer at the review
stage. See Rule 3:3 of the Rules of the Virginia Workers'
Compensation Commission; Nicholson v. Coal Corporation, 154 Va.
401, 153 S.E. 805 (1930). It held that Melkersen had
established no reason why he could not have tendered that
evidence at the hearing before the deputy commissioner. The
record supports this holding.
The commission held that in the absence of countervailing
evidence, Melkersen's testimony that he was the owner of New
Market MetalCraft and that he was self-employed proved that he
was the sole proprietor of that business. The record supports
this holding.
The record established that Melkersen's failure to give
timely notice to the insurer was attributable only to
dereliction. This supports the commission's finding that he
failed to give that notice without reasonable excuse.
- 5 - The judgment of the commission is affirmed.
Affirmed.
- 6 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ole J Melkersen v. New Market MetalCraft,etc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ole-j-melkersen-v-new-market-metalcraftetc-vactapp-2002.