Greenwood v. J.J. Hooligan's
297 Neb. 435
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Lori Greenwood was injured on January 14, 2012 while working for J.J. Hooligan’s (formerly Pies & Pints). She later learned FirstComp claimed it was not the insurer on that date due to nonpayment.
- Greenwood sued J.J. Hooligan’s and FirstComp for workers’ compensation benefits; FirstComp moved to dismiss, asserting it had validly canceled the policy for nonpayment before the accident.
- FirstComp introduced affidavits, an internal spreadsheet showing a November 3, 2011 notice date, a certified-mail tracking number, and proof the Workers’ Compensation Court received notice and recorded cancellation effective November 19, 2011.
- The compensation court found FirstComp had timely sent notice by certified mail, concluded coverage had been canceled November 19, 2011, and dismissed FirstComp as a defendant.
- Greenwood appealed, arguing FirstComp failed to prove mailing (no return receipt, no direct deposit proof, insufficient evidence of office mailing practices, and a tracking number alone is inadequate).
- The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed, holding the record lacked sufficient competent evidence that FirstComp mailed the certified cancellation notice in compliance with Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-144.03.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether insurer proved compliance with § 48-144.03 notice-of-cancellation requirements | Greenwood: FirstComp failed to prove mailing — no return receipt, no direct deposit proof, no established office mailing practice; tracking number alone insufficient | FirstComp: Evidence of certified-mail tracking number, employee affidavits, and court receipt shows compliance | Reversed: insurer did not present sufficient competent evidence of mailing; tracking number and bare affidavit insufficient without proof of mailing process or deposit |
| Whether FirstComp was not liable because coverage had been validly canceled before the injury | Greenwood: Cancellation not proven, so FirstComp remained insurer | FirstComp: Cancellation effective Nov 19, 2011, so not insurer on injury date | Remanded for further proceedings; dismissal of FirstComp was erroneous because cancellation not adequately proven |
Key Cases Cited
- Interiano-Lopez v. Tyson Fresh Meats, 294 Neb. 586, 883 N.W.2d 676 (discusses proof required to establish mailed notices and evidentiary sufficiency)
- Houska v. City of Wahoo, 235 Neb. 635, 456 N.W.2d 750 (affidavit of mailing to office depository insufficient as matter of law without proof mail entered USPS depository)
- Baker v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 240 Neb. 14, 480 N.W.2d 192 (receipt-of-mail presumption requires proof of office/mailroom practice linking deposit to USPS depository)
- Estermann v. Bose, 296 Neb. 228, 892 N.W.2d 857 (appellate courts need not address unnecessary issues when disposition is clear)