The Uninsured Employer's Fund v. Charlie Jeffreys
0693173
| Va. Ct. App. | Oct 3, 2017Background
- In 2012 Charlie Jeffreys was injured (now quadriplegic) when a beam fell while he was helping rebuild the historic Harvey School in Pittsylvania County.
- The Harvey School Historical Society (a small nonprofit) formed to preserve/restore the school; it became an auxiliary of Mount Lebanon Missionary Baptist Church for tax-exempt status; neither entity performed construction work directly.
- Annie Mosby (president of the Historical Society) purchased the building, hired contractors, paid for materials and labor from her personal funds, and lived in California; she delegated day-to-day control of reconstruction to William Jerome Johnson.
- Johnson (an apparent independent contractor) hired Jeffreys as his helper, supervised and instructed him, and tracked hours; Mosby paid wages but did not control means/methods or withhold taxes.
- A deputy commissioner awarded workers’ compensation against the Church and related parties; the Commission reversed as to Mosby and, on remand from this Court, concluded the Historical Society and Church were neither direct nor statutory employers. The Court affirms but remands to direct the Commission to enter a revised order dismissing the claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Were the Historical Society and Church direct employers of Jeffreys? | Jeffreys: Mosby (as Society president) could control workers and thus the Society/Church were his employers. | Fund/Historical Society/Church: Mosby lacked requisite control; Johnson supervised—so they were not employers. | Held: No. Prior ruling that Mosby was not employer is law of the case; neither Society nor Church exercised control—Johnson was the supervisor. |
| Were the Historical Society and Church statutory employers under Va. Code § 65.2-302? | Jeffreys: The Society’s purpose to "restore" the school made reconstruction part of its trade/business, making it (and the Church as affiliate) statutory employers. | Fund: The Society was a small nonprofit that did not carry out construction as its trade; work was done by contractors/independent contractors. | Held: No. The Society’s ordinary activities (fundraising, organizing) did not include full reconstruction; the Society and Church were not in the construction business. |
| Did the Commission fail to provide complete relief by not reversing the deputy commissioner as to the Church and dismissing the claim? | Fund: The Commission should have reversed the award as to all named parties and dismissed the claim. | Commission (implicitly): declined to modify opinion reversing only as to the Historical Society. | Held: Court agrees with Fund. Commission’s opinion affirmed in substance but remanded to enter a revised order reversing the deputy commissioner as to both the Historical Society and the Church and dismissing the claim. |
| Was the Commission’s factual/legal review appropriate on appeal? | Jeffreys: challenges Commission’s factual conclusions on control and trade/business. | Defendants: Commission’s factual findings are supported by credible evidence and prior law of the case controls regarding Mosby. | Held: Commission’s factual findings are supported; review deference applied to Commission; prior appellate ruling about Mosby governs. |
Key Cases Cited
- Artis v. Ottenberg’s Bakers, 45 Va. App. 72, 608 S.E.2d 512 (2005) (on appeal, evidence viewed in light most favorable to the prevailing party below)
- Creative Designs Tattooing Assocs. v. Estate of Parrish, 56 Va. App. 299, 693 S.E.2d 303 (2010) (employee/independent-contractor status is mixed law and fact)
- Intermodal Servs., Inc. v. Smith, 234 Va. 596, 364 S.E.2d 221 (1988) (right-to-control test distinguishes employee from independent contractor)
- Rusty’s Welding Serv., Inc. v. Gibson, 29 Va. App. 119, 510 S.E.2d 255 (1999) (deference to commission factual findings supported by credible evidence)
- Henderson v. Cent. Tel. Co. of Va., 233 Va. 377, 355 S.E.2d 596 (1987) (purpose of § 65.2-302 is to prevent owners escaping liability by subcontracting)
- Rodriguez v. Leesburg Bus. Park, LLC, 287 Va. 187, 754 S.E.2d 275 (2014) (trade/business determination is mixed law and fact; normal-work test explained)
- Shell Oil Co. v. Leftwich, 212 Va. 715, 187 S.E.2d 162 (1972) (normal-work test: whether activity is normally carried on by owner’s employees rather than contractors)
- Nichols v. VVKR, Inc., 241 Va. 516, 403 S.E.2d 698 (1991) (identify owner and examine activities normally carried out by its employees to define trade/business)
- Pfeifer v. Krauss Constr. Co. of Va., 262 Va. 262, 546 S.E.2d 717 (2001) (commercial property developer held statutory employer of certain subcontractors)