Tomas Alonzo (Deceased) Beatriz Alonzo (Widow) vs. Nhan Van Nguyen Aka Kevin Construction, Illegally Uninsured, David Benavides; Pacific Specialty Insurance Company

This case involves Nhan Van Nguyen aka Kevin Construction, who was illegally uninsured, David Benavides, and Pacific Specialty Insurance Company. Tomas Alonzo (deceased) and Beatriz Alonzo (widow) were the applicants. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, finding that Tomas Alonzo was an employee of David Benavides on August 6, 2003, when he sustained industrial injury resulting in his death. The Board found that Kevin Construction was required to obtain insurance as soon as it hired an employee, and that the exemption from the requirement to carry workers' compensation insurance was applicable only so long as Mr. Nguyen hired no employees. Therefore, his contractor's license was automatically suspended when he

Nhan Van Nguyen aka Kevin Construction, Illegally Uninsured, David Benavides; Pacific Specialty Insurance Company Tomas Alonzo (Deceased) Beatriz Alonzo (Widow) WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIATOMAS ALONZO (deceased) BEATRIZ ALONZO (widow), Applicant,vs.    NHAN VAN NGUYEN aka KEVIN CONSTRUCTION, illegally uninsured, DAVID BENAVIDES; PACIFIC SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s).Case No. LAO 0832818; VNO 0508728OPINION AND ORDERDENYING PETITION FORRECONSIDERATION            Defendant David Benavides, the homeowner, and his insurance carrier, Pacific Specialty Insurance Company, seek reconsideration of the October 30, 2007 Findings of Fact and Order, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (“WCJ”) found that Tomas Alonzo was an employee of David Benavides on August 6, 2003, when he sustained industrial injury resulting in his death.            Defendant contends the WCI erred in finding David Benavides to be the employer because the evidence demonstrates that applicant did not work the minimum 52 hours required under Labor Code section 3352(h), because the WCJ’s interpretation of the law is contrary to public interest, and because defendant was denied due process by being compelled to proceed to trial on the issue of employment in the capacity of a non-party, without the opportunity to conduct effective discovery.            We have considered the Petition for Reconsideration and co-defendant Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund’s Answer, and we have reviewed the record in this matter. The WCJ prepared a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (“Report”), , recommending that the petition be denied.            For the reason expressed by the WCJ in his Report, which we adopt and incorporate, and for the reasons discussed below, we will deny the petition for reconsideration.             Labor Code section 2750.5(c) provides that “any person performing any function or activity for which a license is r

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.