Decision  William Burrell v. All Pro Piano Movers/Omar Soffan and Mayakaya Corp. d/b/a Royal Academy of Performing Arts (1)

Date:	04/03/2020
Organization:	Department of Industrial Accidents
Docket Number:	DIA Board Nos. 037380-16, 026693-16
Location:	Boston

• Employee: William Burrell
• Employer: All Pro Piano Movers/Omar Soffan and Mayakaya Corp. d/b/a Royal Academy of Performing Arts
• Insurer: Workers' Compensation Trust Fund and Republic Franklin (Utica) Insurance Co.

CALLIOTTE, J. Republic-Franklin Insurance Company (Utica) appeals from a decision ordering it to pay the employee a closed period of § 34 temporary total incapacity benefits, and §§ 13 and 30 medical benefits for the same period. Utica makes a number of arguments, centering around its contention that the policy of insurance it issued to Mayakaya Corporation d/b/a Royal Academy for Performing Art did not cover the employee or All Pro Piano Movers, the entity for which he allegedly worked. We affirm the decision.

¹  As discussed infra, the issue in this case is whether Utica’s policy of insurance, issued to Mayakaya Corporation d/b/a Royal Academy of Performing Art, covered piano movers, or whether All Pro Piano Movers was a separate and distinct business, which was uninsured.  The employer or insured is not consistently designated throughout the board file, the parties’ briefs, and the judge’s conference order and hearing decision.  For example, the claim against Utica listed the employer as Mayakaya Corporation d/b/a All Pro Piano Movers, although there was no policy with that name.  However, by the time of conference, the employer in the claim against Utica was designated simply as All Pro Piano Movers which the judge abandoned by hearing, going back to the original designation.  We have used the name on the Utica policy.  We note that the Trust Fund’s motion to join the employer lists the employer as Omar Soffan d/b/a All Pro Piano Movers, but the judge does not refer to the employer thus.  Rizzo v. M.B.T.A., 16 Mass. Workers’ Comp. Rep. 160, 161 n.3 (2002)(reviewing board may take judicial notice of documents in board file).