ADJ12002549 · April 13, 2021

The court found that the Luchetti Children's Trust was the applicant's employer at the time of injury and that the applicant was a residential employee under Labor Code Section 3351(d). The petitioner's arguments to the contrary were not supported by substantial evidence.

From the decision · page 7An F&O issued finding that I) the Luchetti Children's Trust was the applicant's employer at the time of injury; 2) Applicant was a residential employee within the meaning Labor Code § 335l(d); 3) Applicant was not an "excluded employee" as set forthin Labor Code § 3352(a)(8); 4) Applicant was not an employee of JL Construction, Inc., JL Builders, Inc., or JL Modular, Inc. on the date of injury; and 5) no general/special employment relationship existed at the time of applicant's injury. Insurance coverage was deferred to the arbitrator.

The court found no evidence of a general/special employment relationship between the applicant and Jeff Luchetti's companies at the time of injury, as the applicant was laid off from JL Modular before starting the woodshed job and was paid by the Luchetti Children's Trust, not JL Modular or any Jeff Luchetti company.

From the decision · page 10The requisite elements of a special/general relationship are unsubstantiated and lack evidentiary support in this case. In such a relationship, the general employer, or.TL Modular as asserted by petitioner, hires and pays the wages of an employee. Here, the applicant was clearly laid off from.TL Modular on June 29, 2018. (Def. Exh. GG.) Three days later, he started the woodshed job on July 2, 2018. (MOH/SOE p. 7, lines 41-42.) The hours worked on the woodshed were turn into Peter Luchetti, not JL Modular or any other company affiliated with Jeff Luchetti. (MOH/SOE, p. 7, line 18.) Luchetti Children's Trust rendered payment to the applicant for his woodshed labor. (Def. Exh. L.) No evidence was provided to show that the applicant was paid by JL Modular or any other Jeff Luchetti companies on August 1, 2018, the date of his injury.

The Luchetti Children's Trust was found to be the applicant's employer at the time of injury.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This fact established the proper employer for workers' compensation purposes, supporting the applicant's claim.

From the decision · page 7An F&O issued finding that I) the Luchetti Children's Trust was the applicant's employer at the time of injury; 2) Applicant was a residential employee within the meaning Labor Code § 335l(d); 3) Applicant was not an "excluded employee" as set forthin Labor Code § 3352(a)(8); 4) Applicant was not an employee of JL Construction, Inc., JL Builders, Inc., or JL Modular, Inc. on the date of injury; and 5) no general/special employment relationship existed at the time of applicant's injury. Insurance coverage was deferred to the arbitrator.

The applicant was a residential employee under Labor Code Section 3351(d).

Favours Applicant prevailed

This classification allowed the applicant to recover workers' compensation benefits.

From the decision · page 8Accordingly, a consensual employment relationship existed between the applicantand Luchetti Children's Trust and the applicant is permitted to recover workers' compensation benefits. B. THE HOUSE CONSTITUTED A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING

No general/special employment relationship existed between the applicant and Jeff Luchetti's companies at the time of injury.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This negated the petitioner's claim that the applicant was employed by Jeff Luchetti's companies, supporting the applicant's position.

From the decision · page 10The requisite elements of a special/general relationship are unsubstantiated and lack evidentiary support in this case. In such a relationship, the general employer, or.TL Modular as asserted by petitioner, hires and pays the wages of an employee. Here, the applicant was clearly laid off from.TL Modular on June 29, 2018. (Def. Exh. GG.) Three days later, he started the woodshed job on July 2, 2018. (MOH/SOE p. 7, lines 41-42.) The hours worked on the woodshed were turn into Peter Luchetti, not JL Modular or any other company affiliated with Jeff Luchetti. (MOH/SOE, p. 7, line 18.) Luchetti Children's Trust rendered payment to the applicant for his woodshed labor. (Def. Exh. L.) No evidence was provided to show that the applicant was paid by JL Modular or any other Jeff Luchetti companies on August 1, 2018, the date of his injury.

Labor Code Section 3357; Yellow Cab v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Edwinson) (1991) 226 Cal.App.3d1288

It is presumed that a person rendering service for another is an employee unless the alleged employer affirmatively proves otherwise.

The petitioner did not affirmatively prove otherwise, so the employment relationship was presumed.

From the decision · page 8Regardless, it is presumed that a person rendering service for another is an employee unless the alleged employer affirmatively proves otherwise. (Lab. Code, § 3357; Yellow Cab v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Edwinson) (1991) 226 Cal.App.3d1288 [56 Cal.Comp.Cases 34].) This was not done here.

The WCJ's credibility determinations were given great weight and were not rejected due to lack of substantial evidence.

From the decision · page 1We have given the WCJ's credibility determinations great weight because the WCJ had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses. (Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312, 318-319 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 500].) Furthermore, we conclude there is no evidence of considerable substantiality that would warrant rejecting the WCJ's credibility determinations. (Id.)