The case of injury at the workplace Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

The case of injury at the workplace - Essay faceThe case of injury at the workplaceThe plaintiff appealed the finding to the court. BWC filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The court ruled in favor of BWC holding that Plaintiff had not exhausted administrative remedies and dismissed the appeal. Subsequently, the plaintiff moved to the Tenth District Court of Appeals which upheld the decision of the trial court. The plaintiff did not hold on there but made a indorse Workers Compensation claim application with BWC. This second application was administratively rejected by BWC and Industrial deputation at all levels. The plaintiff then appealed BWCs decision to the court. At that point, the BWC (hereby called the defendant) made the motion to dismiss or in alternative for summary feeling (the subject to the present appeal) on grounds that decision of the defendant denying the appli fag endts first application acted as a bar for his making the second application, und er the doctrine of res Judicata. Therefore, the main ply in the application was whether the second workers compensation application by the plaintiff can be heard de novo by BWC or it was forbid under the doctrine of res Judicata.The court found that the second application should contain been heard de novo by the defendant. The reasoning of the court was that the schoolmaster workers compensation claim was not heard on merit but was dismissed on adjectival technicalities and, therefore, the doctrine of res Judicata did not apply. ... This second application was administratively rejected by BWC and Industrial Commission at all levels. The plaintiff then appealed BWCs decision to the court. At that point, the BWC (hereby called the defendant) made the motion to dismiss or in alternative for summary judgment (the subject to the present appeal) on grounds that decision of the defendant denying the applicants first application acted as a bar for his making the second application, und er the doctrine of res Judicata. Therefore, the main issue in the application was whether the second workers compensation application by the plaintiff can be heard de novo by BWC or it was barred under the doctrine of res Judicata. The court found that the second application should have been heard de novo by the defendant. The reasoning of the court was that the original workers compensation claim was not heard on merit but was dismissed on procedural technicalities and, therefore, the doctrine of res Judicata did not apply. The court relied on a decision of the Tenth District Court of Appeals in Greene v Conrad (10th Dist., 1997) where the court held that BWC had denied the application on procedural ground, and which did not constitute adjudication of the dispute on its merits and, therefore, the doctrine of res Judicata could not apply. Therefore, the court dismissed the defendants motion to dismiss and remanded back the matter to BWC for proceedings. The trial court found that th e original workers compensation claim application was filed by another person other than the plaintiff with BWC without the knowledge of the plaintiff and therefore, the claim cannot be held to have been adjudicated on merit since he was not pricy as a party. Present Appeal