Reinhardt v. Walden Hatton LM Insurance Corp., 090821 VAWC, VA00001465677

Docket NºJurisdiction Claim VA00001465677
Case DateSeptember 08, 2021
Jurisdiction Claim No. VA00001465677
Claim Administrator File No. 80DA55399
Virginia In The Workers’ Compensation Commission
September 8, 2021
          DATE OF INJURY: JANUARY 17, 2018           Steven Hammond, Esquire Bradford M. Young, Esquire For the Claimant.           Andrew Suddarth, Esquire For Walden Hatton and Liberty Mutual Insurance Corp.           J. David Griffin, Esquire For Forest Hills Manor, LLC           Justin R. Main, Esquire For Erie Insurance Co. of New York           NEWMAN COMMISSIONER          REVIEW on the record by Commissioner Marshall, Commissioner Newman, and Commissioner Rapaport at Richmond, Virginia.          The claimant requested review of the Deputy Commissioner’s April 15, 2021 Opinion finding his claim barred by res judicata. We VACATE and REMAND.          I. Material Proceedings          The claimant alleges that he sustained a back injury on January 17, 2018 when he stepped down from a ladder onto an unsecured board. He filed claims with the Commission seeking medical and disability benefits and identified his employer as Walden Hatton (“Hatton”). In a Petition for Approval of a Compromise Settlement, Hatton denied liability and averred the claimant was not his employee, but nonetheless agreed to a settlement whereby the claimant would release Hatton from liability for the sum of $100,000. The Commission approved the settlement on December 27, 2018, and Hatton’s insurer paid the claimant on January 3, 2019.          On February 1, 2019, the claimant filed the present claim, contending his January 17, 2018 accident occurred while he was employed by Forest Hills Manor, LLC (“Forest Hills Manor”). Again, he sought medical and disability benefits. Because the new claim (JCN VA0200003191) alleged the same accident date and injury as that previously settled, the two claims were consolidated with Hatton and its insurer joined as “Interested Parties.” Pertinent to the present review, Forest Hills Manor argued the claim was...

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