State Compensation Fund v. Le Desma

531 P.2d 171, 23 Ariz. App. 126, 1975 Ariz. App. LEXIS 492
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona
DecidedJanuary 28, 1975
DocketNo. 1 CA-IC 999
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 531 P.2d 171 (State Compensation Fund v. Le Desma) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Compensation Fund v. Le Desma, 531 P.2d 171, 23 Ariz. App. 126, 1975 Ariz. App. LEXIS 492 (Ark. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

OPINION

STEVENS, Judge.

This appeal must determine whether there is reasonable evidence to support The Industrial Commission’s finding that Ernest Le Desma, the respondent employee, was an employee of the City of Phoenix under the workmen’s compensation laws of this State.

Ernest Le Desma (Le Desma) was injured on a field trip in the Oak Creek Canyon while supervising a group of inner-city youngsters taken there under the auspices of the Barrio Youth Project (BYP) on 29 July 1972. Le Desma was uncertain of the actual identity of his summer employer and consequently filed claims against the City of Phoenix on 25 September 1972; against the County of Maricopa Board of Supervisors on 10 October 1972; and against the BYP on 9 January 1973. The claim was denied , on 12 October 1972 by the State Compensation Fund on behalf of the City of Phoenix (City) by a notice of claim status asserting that the claimant was not in the employ of the City of Phoenix at the time of the injury. The claim against the County of Maricopa Board of Supervisors was denied on 4 December 1972 for a similar reason. The claim against the BYP was denied because the BYP was not an insured of the State Compensation Fund at the time of the alleged injury. The claimant filed a timely request for a hearing and formal consolidated hearings were held on 22 February and 6 March 1973. On 10 April 1973, the hearing officer filed a Consolidated Decision Upon Hearing and Findings And Award finding that the City of Phoenix [128]*128was the employer of Le Desma and made the award payable to Le Desma by the City of Phoenix and its insurer, the State Compensation Fund. A request for review was filed and on 21 May 1973 The Industrial Commission affirmed the hearing officer in its Decision Upon Review Affirming Consolidated Decision Upon Hearing And Findings And Award.

In order to answer the question presented for review, we must examine the record and dissect the intricate relationship among federal, county and city agencies. Le Desma was officially an employee of the BYP. BYP is a non-profit corporation and it essentially serves the inner-city area by operating a print shop to train inner-city youth in the printing business. This operation exists due to a contract between the City and the BYP. The trainees for the printing shop are selected by the BYP but get paid by a City paycheck and the City provides workmen’s compensation insurance, both paid for by federal funds. In 1971 and 1972, the BYP also provided recreational programs for children, ages 8-13, who are too young to work and who live in the inner-city areas.

In 1970, the City received $144,000 from the Department of Labor to provide a summer recreation program for inner-city youth. This was known as the Recreation Support Program and the Department of Labor provided a certain set of guidelines as to how this money could be spent. The first year, the City administered the program and hired all the employees. The payroll staff signed them up, fingerprinted them and even purchased all necessary supplies through its purchasing department. In 1971, the second year of the program, the City decided to change its method of operation and divided the federal money by providing $100,000 to the Recreation Support Program, which is a separate City agency that provides an extension of the programs provided by the City Parks and Recreation Department. The Recreation Support Program, due to the nature of its funding, existed only during the summertime. The other $44,000 was divided among non-governmental agencies.

The agencies applied for the money by presenting a summer program together with its cost to the Leisure Group Work Services Conference from the Community Council which is primarily composed of United Fund, agencies. The Leisure Group Work Service Conference was required to keep the total money granted to these agencies within the $44,000 limit. The power of final approval rested with the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. Some IS to 18 agencies were granted funds, including the BYP, The Boy Scouts, The Girl Scouts, the Campfire Girls, the YMCA and the South Mountain Y. These agencies, with the exception of the BYP, used these extra funds to support and. expand their usual activities. All of the additional help was paid by City paychecks.

The BYP is the youth component of the Chícanos Por La Causa, another non-profit corporation whose activities are essentially housing and economic development of the inner-city area. The BYP had not been involved in recreational programs in the past. When the federal funds were made available, the BYP proposed a summer recreation program and applied to the City for the funds to pay for it. The BYP applied for $6,418 and received $3,000 for a summer recreation program. The BYP drew against these funds to pay its employees who were paid by City checks.

In 1972, the City made further changes in the program. The same agencies applied for and received similar amounts of money but thereafter the additional personnel hired by the 'agencies wer.e paid by their respective agencies. The agency would turn in a claim for money, such as payroll and supplies, to the City Recreation Support Program which would approve the claims, forward them to the County Neighborhood Youth Corps which would in turn pay the agencies from the federal funds that it held. The agencies would then take this money and pay its own staff. This [129]*129was the situation when Le Desma was employed by the BYP.

Le Desma was hired by the BYP in June of 1972 as the assistant director of the summer recreation program. He was hired by Mike Rojas who was the director of the summer recreation program provided by the BYP. Le Desma’s employment was approved by Earl Wilcox who was the director of the BYP. Le Desma and Rojas were paid from the bank account of the BYP and their W-2 forms were imprinted with the BYP, as their employer. Wilcox, however, was paid by the Chicanos Por La Causa, the parent organization of the BYP.

Le Desma, as Assistant Director, supervised the children together with Rojas, while they engaged in sports and creative activities. The BYP used its own building, as well as the facilities of the Lowell Elementary School and a room located in the Marcos DeNiza housing project for its activities. In addition, City parks and City swimming pools were also used. The Recreation Support Program would either provide free swimming passes to the BYP or the BYP made unofficial arrangements with the personnel managing the pools to admit the children free. The BYP would also utilize activities sponsored by the City such as watermelon busts and pie-eating contests. The Summer Recreation Program included field trips in its activities and the inner-city children, including those of the BYP, were taken on a voluntary basis to the San Diego Zoo and Oak Creek Canyon among other places.

On 29 July 1972, the BYP organized a field trip to the Oak Creek Canyon. This trip was completely independent of all city and county agencies. Le Desma contacted someone at Luke Air Force Base which provided a bus for transportation. Le Desma, Rojas and a volunteer supervisor accompanied the children. It was on this trip that Le Desma slipped in the area of the “Slide Rock”, fell and seriously injured himself. This injury is the basis of the claim now under consideration.

On 10 April 1973, the hearing officer filed a Consolidated Decision Upon Hearing And Findings And Award.

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

Related

McNeil v. Industrial Commission
617 P.2d 531 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1980)
El Dorado Insurance Co. v. Industrial Commission
545 P.2d 465 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
531 P.2d 171, 23 Ariz. App. 126, 1975 Ariz. App. LEXIS 492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-compensation-fund-v-le-desma-arizctapp-1975.