from the Superior Court in Mohave County No. S8015CV201600092
The Honorable Charles W. Gurtler, Judge
Skiver Law Firm, Scottsdale By Ryan Skiver, Larsa Khanice
Co-Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant
& Associates, PC, LLO, Omaha, NE By James E. Harris, Pro
Hac Vice Co-Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant
Skelton & Hochuli, PLC, Phoenix By Phillip H. Stanfield,
Daniel O. King, Jennifer B. Anderson Counsel for
Patricia A. Orozco  delivered the opinion of the Court, in
which Presiding Judge Michael J. Brown and Judge Jennifer B.
Plaintiff Stephanie Jackson (Jackson) appeals the superior
court's judgment in favor of Defendants Eagle KMC, LLC,
Rachael Gabriella Hender, Werner Enterprises, Inc., and
Drivers Management, LLC (collectively Eagle). Because the
court erred in granting summary judgment, we reverse and
remand for further proceedings.
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The facts in this case are not in dispute. Jackson, a South
Carolina resident, was employed as a truck driver by Drivers
Management, a Nebraska company. Drivers Management contracted
with Eagle, an Arizona company, to train Jackson to drive a
semi-tractor trailer. In February 2014, Jackson was riding as
a student-passenger in the sleeper berth of a semi-tractor
trailer in Golden Valley. Rachael Hender, an Eagle employee,
was driving under Werner Enterprises' federal motor
carrier USDOT number and authority. Jackson suffered serious
injuries after Hender allegedly lost control and rolled the
Jackson filed a workers' compensation claim against
Drivers Management in Nebraska, as required by her employment
contract. The workers' compensation claim was adjudicated
in Nebraska. Drivers Management was self-insured for
workers' compensation and had a subrogation claim against
any third-party recovery.
In February 2016, Jackson filed this lawsuit against Eagle in
Mohave County before the running of the two-year statute of
limitations under Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) section
12-542. Jackson included Drivers Management as a defendant
solely for the "purpose of reimbursement, under the
right of subrogation, " as required by Nebraska law.
Eagle filed a motion to dismiss, later converted to a motion
for summary judgment, alleging Jackson's complaint was
time-barred by A.R.S. § 23-1023.B and Drivers Management
was not a proper defendant under A.R.S. § 23-1022.A.
Jackson's response explained Drivers Management was
included as a defendant solely for subrogation purposes
pursuant to Nebraska law, and because Arizona law did not
apply to her workers' compensation complaint, the
one-year time-bar under A.R.S. § 23-1023.B was
inapplicable. In reply, Eagle argued that regardless of
whether Jackson received benefits in Nebraska, she was still
entitled to workers' compensation benefits in Arizona and
thus, § 23-1023.B was applicable.
The superior court found there was no material fact at issue
because Jackson's complaint was not filed within one year
of the accident, and she did not receive a reassignment from
Drivers Management as required under A.R.S. § 23-1023.
Therefore, the court concluded that Eagle was entitled to
summary judgment as a matter of law.
Jackson filed a motion for reconsideration, Eagle filed a
response and oral argument was held. The superior court again
granted summary judgment to Eagle and reiterated its original
findings. Jackson timely ...