Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Claimant worked at a Kansas City, Missouri hair salon and cut hair. He was at home with his two small children in April 2009 when another hair dresser asked him to cover his appointments. When he arrived at the salon, an unknown robber shot him in the upper abdomen and the claimant died later the same day. The Commission found his widow and children could not recover benefits under workers' compensation law.
The Commission affirmed a denial of benefits. In a divided 2-1 opinion it found that the claimant was an independent contractor and not an employee because the salon owner did not exercise sufficient control. The salon had no worker's compensation insurance or any written agreement with its six operators. The salon provided space and some supplies and split receipts but did not schedule appointments or withhold taxes. A dissent argued that an agreement to split receipts was a verbal contract to find the salon liable as a statutory employer. Pacheco, dec. v Tina's Hair Salon, 2012 MOWCLR LEXIS 47 (March 15, 2012).
Source: Martin Klug, Huck, Howe & Tobin. Read Martin Klug's Mo. Workers' Comp Alerts.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.