No. 08-93776. JACK'S SOUTH ASHLAND PETITIONER V. MARY MOORE and HON. JOSEPH W. JUSTICE,.

• Court: Kentucky

Kentucky Workers Compensation 2011. No. 08-93776. JACK'S SOUTH ASHLAND PETITIONER V. MARY MOORE and HON. JOSEPH W. JUSTICE, JACK'S SOUTH ASHLAND PETITIONER V. MARY MOORE and HON. JOSEPH W. JUSTICE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE RESPONDENTS OPINION ENTERED: FEBRUARY 2, 2011CLAIM NO. 08-93776APPEAL FROM HON. JOSEPH W. JUSTICE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGEOPINION DISMISSING * * * * *BEFORE: ALVEY, Chairman, COWDEN and STIVERS, Members.ALVEY, Chairman. On August 30, 2010, the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") issued an opinion, award and order. Jack's South Ashland ("Jack's") filed a petition for reconsideration which was granted in part and denied in part by order of the ALJ issued on November 10, 2010. On December 8, 2010, Jack's filed a notice of appeal. On December 27, 2010, after the thirty (30) days in which to file a notice of appeal expired, Jack's filed a motion for leave to amend the notice of appeal to join the Injured Worker's Pharmacy ("IWP") and Dr. Pramit Bhasin, as parties to the appeal. On January 12, 2011, this Board entered an Order denying the motion to amend and granted fifteen (15) days for Jack's to show cause why any portion of the appeal relating to the indispensable parties which were not joined as parties should be addressed. On January 26, 2011, Jack's filed a response to the show cause order acknowledging it failed to include indispensable parties in its notice of appeal. Jack's further blamed the problem as originating with the ALJ's opinion and award dated August 3, 2010 which failed to list either Dr. Bhasin or the IWP in the style or the certificate of service. This alleged deficiency was not previously raised despite the fact Jack's filed a petition for reconsideration. The fact remains indispensable parties were not joined in this appeal. There is no dispute IWP and Dr. Bhasin are indispensable parties to this appeal. The failure to name an indispensable party is a jurisdictional defect fatal to an appeal. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Department of Finance, Division of Printing v. Drury, 846 S.W.2d 702 ( Ky. 1993). Consequently, we are without jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the arguments raised by Jack's on appeal. An indispensable party to an appeal is one whose absence prevents the tribunal from granting complete relief among those already listed as parties. See CR 19.01; CR 19.02; Braden v...