12-0029. JACK A MCGUIRE Employee Petitioner v. CONAM CONSTRUCTION Employer and ZURICH AMERICAN INS CO Insurer Respondant(s).

Court:Alaska
 
FREE EXCERPT
Alaska Workers Compensation Decisions 2012. Workers' Compensation Board 12-0029. JACK A MCGUIRE Employee Petitioner v. CONAM CONSTRUCTION Employer and ZURICH AMERICAN INS CO Insurer Respondant(s) JACK A MCGUIRE, Employee, Petitioner v. CONAM CONSTRUCTION, Employer, and ZURICH AMERICAN INS CO, Insurer, Respondant(s).AWCB Decision No. 12-0029Filed with AWCB Fairbanks, Alaskaon February 17th, 2012AWCB Case No. 200607616INTERLOCUTORY DECISION AND ORDERJack A. McGuire's (Employee) petition for change of venue was heard in Fairbanks, Alaska on October 13, 2011. Employee appeared and represented himself. Attorney Jeffrey Holloway represented Conam Construction and Zurich American Insurance Company (collectively Employer). There were no witnesses. The record closed at the hearing's conclusion on October 13, 2011. ISSUE Employee contends his request to change venue to Anchorage, Alaska should be granted since Anchorage is a more convenient venue for any future hearings on his claim because he lives in Wasilla, his doctors are in Wasilla or Anchorage, and Employer's main office is in Anchorage. Employer on the other hand contends venue is proper in Fairbanks because Employee was injured on the North Slope and the nearest workers' compensation office is Fairbanks. Employer further contends witnesses to Employee's injury are fellow Slope workers and Fairbanks would be the convenient hearing venue for them. Furthermore, Employer maintains an office in Fairbanks although its principal office is located in Anchorage. Shall venue be changed from Fairbanks to Anchorage? FINDINGS OF FACT A review of the record establishes the following facts and factual conclusions by a preponderance of the evidence: 1) Employee was injured on May 24, 2006, while working for Employer at Rowan Camp #41 at Prudhoe Bay (Report of Occupational Injury (ROI), May 25, 2006). 2) Employee lives in Wasilla, Alaska, which is closer to Anchorage than to Fairbanks (Employee; record; experience, observations, judgment). 3) Employer's principal office is located in Anchorage, Alaska (ROI; record). 4) Employee's doctors practice in either Anchorage or Wasilla (Employee; record). 5) Employee's witnesses reside in Anchorage or Wasilla (Employee). 6) Employee sustains an increase cost in transportation expenses in order to attend hearings in Fairbanks in person and an increase in telephone costs to participate in prehearings by telephone (experience, observations, and judgment). 7) Employer's Medical Evaluation (EME) was...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP