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.
Where a defendant contracted with Manpower Group US (Manpower) regarding the services of a worker and controlled and directed the manner, details, and ultimate result of the worker’s work, it was the worker’s special employer and, therefore, it was also immune from tort liability where the worker had received workers’ compensation benefits from the general employer, Manpower. In an affidavit offered at the time of a motion for summary judgment was argued, the worker indicated he had not been under the supervision of the defendant company. The court observed that the affidavit contradicted the worker’s own deposition testimony. Summary judgment in favor of the defendant/special employer was granted.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See James v. Crystal Springs Water, 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5707 (Aug. 15, 2018)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 100.01.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law