2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-4-2008 

# Ale a N Ame r Ins C o v

. S ale m M a sonry C o Inc P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-1681

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" Ale a N Ame r In s C o v

. S ale m M as onry C o Inc " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 162. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/162NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 07- 1681

___________ AL E A NOR T H AMER I CA I NS UR ANC E CO M P ANY,

A ppel l ant v. S A L E M M A S O N R Y C O . , I N C . d /b / a S a l e m M a s o n ry; PAD OV AN O FRA NK EL VO UG A A GEN CY ; NU NO ALEX AN DR E;

GR ANI T E S T AT E I NS UR ANC E CO M P ANY

___________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

forthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 03- cv- 02927) D i s tr i ctJ udge: T he H onor abl e Pet erG . Sher i dan

___________ A r gued: Sept ember9, 2008 B efore: S L O V ITE R , F U E N T E S , and N Y G A A R D , C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: D ece m ber4, 2008) M ar i e A . H oeni ngs , E s q. ( A r gued) L ’ A bbat e, B al kan, C ol avi t a & C ont i ni 7 R egentSt r eet , Sui t e 711 L i vi ngs t on, N J 07039 C ouns el forA ppel l ant C hr i s t opherH . W es tr i ck, E s q. ( A r gued) G ol den, R oths chi l d, Spagnol a, L undel l , L evi t t , & B oy l an2

10 11 R ou t e 22 W est P. O . B ox 6881, Sui t e 300 B r i dgew at er , N J 08807 C ouns el forA ppel l ee, G r ani t e St at e I ns . C o.

___________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

___________ N Y G A A R D , C i r cui tJ udge. T h e f a c tu a l b a c k g ro u n d o f

th is a p p e a l is w e ll k n o w n to th e p a rties , o n ly t angent i al l ygerm ane t o ourdeci s i on, and ca l l s foronl ythi s br i ef s um m ary . J os eph P e rc a ri o is a g e n e ra l c o n tr a c to r w h o h ir e d S a le m M a s o n ry In c ., a s a s u b -c o n tr a c to r. G r ani t e St at e I ns ur ance pr ovi ded w or ker s compensa t i on i ns ur ance t o Per car i o. A ppel l ant A le a N o rt h A m e ri c a n In s u ra n c e p ro v id e d w o rk e rs c o m p e n s a tio n in s u ra n c e to S a le m . Sal em M as onryl i ed on i t s i ns ur ance appl i cat i on, cl ai m i ng thatnone of i t s empl oy ees w or ked athei ght s gr eat erthan fi ft een f eet . N uno A l exandr e, an empl oy ee of Sal em M as onry , w as s ever el yi nj ur ed w hen he f el l dow n an el evat ors haftthatw as a p p ro x im a te ly f

iv e o r s ix s to ri e s h ig h . A l ea I ns ur ance qui ckl yr eal i zed thatA l exandr e w as w or ki ng ata hei ghtgr eat er than fi ft een f

eetand fi l ed an a ct i on, fi r s t , t o r es ci nd i t s pol i cybeca us e of the fr audul ent stat em en t i n the a p p li ca ti o n , an d sec o n d , to d ec lare the g en era l con tr ac tor’s ca rri er, G r ani t e St at e, r es pons i bl e forpay i ng w or ker s compensa t i on benef i t s t o the i nj ur edT h e D istric t C o u rt e n ter e d f in a l ju d g m e n t o n F e b ru a ry7 , 2 0 0 7 , d isp o sin g o f a ll 1. r emai ni ng cl ai m s of the var i ous part i es . A l ea f i l ed a t i m el yN ot i ce of

A ppeal on M ar ch 6, 2007. W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1291. 3 empl oy ee. A l ea a l s o s oughtr ei m bur s ementfr om G r ani t e St at e forthe bene fi t s i thad pai d t o A l exandr e. T h e D istric t C o u rt g ra n ted p a rtial s u m m a ryju d g m e n t in f a v o r o f A lea o n its e q u ita b le f

ra u d c la im . T h is ju d g m e n t v o id e d a n d re s c in d e d A le a ’s p o lic yw ith S a le m .

1 L i t i gat i on cont i nued on var i ous cl ai m s br oughtagai ns tthe br oker s , Sal em M as onryand the cl ai m byA l ea a gai ns tG r ani t e St at e forr ei m bur s ementof paym ent s t o the i nj ur ed empl oy ee. Subse quentt o t he part i al s um m aryj udgm ent , the Super i orC our tof N ew J er s ey issue d an o p inion h o lding that fra u d u lent stat em en ts m ad e in a n ap p li ca ti o n fo r a w o rke rs c o m p e n s a tio n p o lic yc o u ld n o t b e a b a s is f o r v o id in g f

o r t h e p o lic y . A m er i can Mi l l enn i um Insurance v. Berga nza , 9 0 2 A .2 d 2 6 6 (N .J. A p p . D iv . 2 0 0 6 ). B a se d o n th is new s t at e- courtpr ece dent , G r ani t e St at e fi l ed a mot i on pur s uantt o F ED .R .C IV .P . 6 0 (b ) to have the s um m aryj udgm entr es ci nded. T he D i s tr i ctC our tdet erm i ned the A m er i can M i l l enni um cas e t o be “s quar el yon poi nt ” and gr ant ed G r ani t e St at e’ s m ot i on t o s etas i de i t s pr evi ous j udgm enti n favorof A l ea. A t o ra l ar g u m e n t, A p p e llan t w ith d re w its a rg u m e n t th a t F ED .R .C IV .P 60( b) di d not author i ze the D i s tr i ctC our tt o r econs i deri t s part i al s um m aryj udgm entbas ed upon s ubs equentchange s i n t he l aw . T hatw as w i s e. T he D i s tr i ctC our tchange d i t s rul i ng4

b e f o re th e litig a tio n h a d e n d e d . F ED .R .C IV . P. 60( b) cont empl at es r el i ef f r om a f i nal ju d g m e n t. A d istric t co u rt is e n tit led to re c o n sid e r its in ter lo c u to ryo rd e rs “ w h e n it i s cons onantw i th j us t i ce t o do s o. ” U nited S tates v. Jerry , 4 8 7 F . 2 d 6 0 0 , 6 0 5 (3d C ir . 1 9 7 3 ). T h e D istri ct C o u rth ere clea rl yh ad the a u tho ri tyto resc ind it s p arti al su m m ary ju d g m e n t f

o r A lea o n th e re sc iss io n c laim w h ile A lea ’s d a m a g e s c laim s w e re still pendi ng. T he onl yques t i on r emai ni ng on appea l i s w hetherthe D i s tr i ctC our terr ed i n how i ti nt erpr et ed and appl i ed the N ew J er s eyA ppel l at e D i vi s i on’ s deci s i on i n A m er i can Mi l l e n n i u m t o t he i ns t antact i on. W e have car eful l yexami ned the r ecor d and cons i der ed the p arti es’ a rgu m en ts on ap p ea l and co n clud e tha t th e D istri ct C o u rtd id n o t err. A cc o rdin g ly , w e w il l aff irm esse n ti all yfo r th e re aso n s set fo rth in Ju d g e S h erida n ’s o p in io n .