Reversing, in relevant part, an appellate panel’s determination that an injured roofer was an independent contractor, and not an employee of a roofing contractor for whom he was providing services, a South Carolina appellate court held that while... Read More

A New York appellate court held there was conflicting evidence as to whether the plaintiff’s employer had the right to exercise control over a construction worker who was performing sheetrock work at the employer’s premises. Accordingly, the... Read More

Noting that control of the work and the manner in which the work is accomplished is the key factor in the analysis of whether a particular worker is an employee or an employment relationship, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania agreed with a determination... Read More

The Supreme Court of California held its earlier decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court , (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903, 232 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1, 416 P.3d 1 , should be applied retroactively. That somewhat controversial decision set forth a three... Read More

Stressing there was a distinction between control over the workplace, on the one hand, and control of the worker, on the other, the Court of Appeals of Maryland reversed a decision of lower appellate court that had concluded Tyson Farms was a co-employer... Read More

A Michigan appellate court held that a part-time bartender, who was "paid under the table," and who sustained a serious ankle injury when she tripped while working, was an independent contractor--not an employee of the bar. Accordingly, she... Read More

Based on the record evidence, an Idaho skydiving instructor may have been an employee, not an independent contractor, held the state's Supreme Court. The Court said the matter should be remanded for a proper determination since the magistrate court... Read More

An Arkansas appellate court held that while the payment (and collection) of workers' compensation insurance premiums based upon a particular worker's earnings was one factor to be considered in determining whether that worker was an employee or... Read More

Where the plaintiff and her husband contracted to drive a semi-truck for a trucking company, were both subject to termination by the company, and were not free to drive for other trucking companies, there was sufficient evidence of control to characterize... Read More

A Washington appellate court recently affirmed an assessment of almost $1 million in workers’ compensation premiums, penalties, and interest against a Seattle delivery service company that had argued its drivers were independent contractors and... Read More

A New York appellate court recently ruled that a state trial court was beyond its powers when it determined that an injured worker was an independent contractor and not an employee. Such a determination was for the state’s Workers’ Compensation... Read More

In a split decision, the Supreme Court of Michigan held that MCLS § 418.171(4)—a provision that prohibits the misclassification of certain employees in order to avoid workers’ compensation liability—did not apply to a plaintiff... Read More

Where a restaurant owner hired an experienced remodeler to complete work at the restaurant prior to its opening, neither the owner nor the restaurant was engaged in the “construction industry,” held the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Accordingly... Read More

An Ohio court affirmed a finding that a logger was an independent contractor and not an employee, where evidence indicated the logger was hired at a rate of $80 per day, the logger had represented that he had extensive experience in logging, the logger... Read More