Court Opinion

ID: 9632674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:21:38.10801+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:08:38.437025
License: Public Domain

BAKES, Chief Justice,
specially concurring:
I concur in all of the Court’s opinion, except a reservation I have about Part A(2) which seems to suggest that the claimant can proceed against one entity, “Riviera Apartments,” throughout the proceedings, and then at the end try to bring in and hold responsible certain individuals by the mere filing of a motion to change the caption of the proceedings in order to list the individuals as defendant-employers. I see some procedural due process problems with that procedure. However, since the Court merely vacates and remands on that issue, and remands the cause “for the Commission to hold further proceedings to determine whether the requested amended of the caption would unfairly prejudice the owners of the Riviera Apartments,” I concur with the Court’s remand to hold further proceedings on that issue.
CAREY, J. Pro Tern, concurs.