Legislature(2003 - 2004)
2004-05-04 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2004-05-04 House Journal Page 3798 SB 323 The following, which was advanced to third reading from the May 3, 2004, calendar (page 3766), was read the third time: 2004-05-04 House Journal Page 3799 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 323(JUD) am "An Act relating to a subcontractor's, contractor's, and project owner's liability for workers' compensation, to sole proprietors and partnerships without employees, and managers or managing members of limited liability companies, and to the exclusiveness of liability for workers' compensation." Representative Harris moved and asked unanimous consent that CSSB 323(JUD) am be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 1. Representative Holm objected and withdrew the objection. There being no further objection, CSSB 323(JUD) am was returned to second reading. Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representatives Harris and Croft: Page 2, line 14, following "subcontractor": Insert "that has secured the payment of compensation for its own employees as required by (a) of this section" Page 2, line 26: Delete "not" Page 2, line 28, following "death.": Insert "However, the project owner, contractor, or subcontractor, or an insurer of the project owner, contractor, or subcontractor who has paid any amount of compensation on behalf of a sole proprietor, member of a partnership, or manager or managing member of a limited liability company under this subsection, has a cause of action to recover any amounts paid." Page 3, following line 15: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 6. AS 23.30.055 is amended by adding a new subsection to read: (b) Notwithstanding (a) of this section, a sole proprietor, member of a partnership, or manager or managing member of a limited liability company may maintain an action under AS 23.30.045(h)." 2004-05-04 House Journal Page 3800 Representative Harris moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. Representative Anderson objected. Representative Croft placed a call of the House and lifted the call. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 323(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 18 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Harris, Heinze, Joule, Kapsner, Kerttula, Kookesh, Lynn, Morgan, Weyhrauch, Wolf Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Fate, Foster, Gatto, Hawker, Holm, Kohring, Kott, Masek, McGuire, Meyer, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Stepovich, Stoltze, Williams, Wilson Absent: Moses And so, Amendment No. 1 was not adopted. Representative Seaton moved and asked unanimous consent that he be allowed to abstain from voting because of a conflict of interest. Objection was heard, and Representative Seaton was required to vote. Representative Kott declared a conflict of interest. Representative Anderson placed a call of the House. The call was satisfied. Representative Chenault moved and asked unanimous consent that he be allowed to abstain from voting because of a conflict of interest. Objection was heard, and Representative Chenault was required to vote. Representative Anderson lifted the call.