08R-11WC. Estate of Stephen Paul Carr v. Verizon New England, Inc.

CourtVermont
Vermont Workers Compensation 2011. 08R-11WC. Estate of Stephen Paul Carr v. Verizon New England, Inc Estate of Stephen Paul Carr v. Verizon New England, Inc.(July 11, 2011)STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOREstate of Stephen Paul Carr, by and through the Widow and Administratrix, Bonnie Carr v.Verizon New England, Inc.Opinion No. 08R-11WCBy: Phyllis Phillips, Esq. Hearing OfficerFor: Anne M. Noonan CommissionerState File No. Y-53261RULING ON CLAIMANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Claimant moves for reconsideration of the Commissioner's ruling granting summary judgment in Defendant's favor and denying summary judgment in Claimant's favor. Claimant alleges that a factual issue exists as to whether he was or was not engaged in a business-related task at the time of his injury on Thursday morning, June 29, 2006. As support for this allegation, he points to the sworn testimony of Bonnie Carr, his wife. Mrs. Carr testified that Claimant telephoned her on Wednesday evening and advised that he "had to go into work for a little while in the morning" to photocopy and/or fax some documents. Claimant asserts that in ruling on Defendant's summary judgment motion, this testimony must be accepted as true, that it establishes a business purpose for his presence in the area on Thursday morning and that therefore Defendant's motion must fail. I accept as true Mrs. Carr's assertion that Claimant advised her during a telephone conversation on Wednesday evening that he would be working Thursday morning. I do not accept as true that this is in fact what Claimant did. As stated in my prior ruling, the undisputed evidence establishes that Claimant was neither going to nor coming from the Hinesburg Road facility at the time of his injury. Estate of Carr v. Verizon New England, Inc., Opinion No. 08-11WC (April 29, 2011) at Discussion ^10. Even accepting Mrs. Carr's testimony as to Claimant's intent to "go into work for a little while," furthermore, there is nothing at all to link him to the Lincoln Street Central Office, and it would be pure speculation to place him there as opposed to any number of other photocopy or fax locations. I conclude that Mrs. Carr's testimony fails to establish a genuine issue of material fact sufficient to overcome summary judgment in Defendant's favor. As to his own summary judgment motion, Claimant asserts...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT