ILNews

High court takes workers' compensation case

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer Thursday to case involving part of the worker's compensation statute that the Indiana Court of Appeals called "somewhat obscure."

In Everett Cash Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rick and Katrina Taylor, No. 02A03-0808-CV-386, the Court of Appeals had to decide whether the Taylors were negligent in failing to make sure an independent contractor had workers' compensation insurance because they believed their farm personal liability policy from Everett would cover all risks occurring on their property.

The majority ruled based on Indiana Code Section 22-3-2-14 that the Taylors were potentially liable for payment of workers' compensation benefits to the injured man just as if they directly employed him.

The majority also found Everett wasn't estopped from denying coverage for the independent contractor's claim because there wasn't any designated evidence to show the Taylors thought they were receiving coverage for the precise situation that happened in this case. In the absence of evidence they were led to believe at the time they originally bought the policy that it would provide coverage for this specific situation, there can't be estoppel.

Judge L. Mark Bailey dissented because he believed there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding the estoppel claim.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Contact Lea Shelemey attorney in porter county Indiana. She just helped us win our case...she is awesome...

  2. We won!!!! It was a long expensive battle but we did it. I just wanted people to know it is possible. And if someone can point me I. The right direction to help change the way the courts look as grandparents as only grandparents. The courts assume the parent does what is in the best interest of the child...and the court is wrong. A lot of the time it is spite and vindictiveness that separates grandparents and grandchildren. It should not have been this long and hard and expensive...Something needs to change...

  3. Typo on # of Indiana counties

  4. The Supreme Court is very proud that they are Giving a billion dollar public company from Texas who owns Odyssey a statewide monopoly which consultants have said is not unnecessary but worse they have already cost Hoosiers well over $100 MILLION, costing tens of millions every year and Odyssey is still not connected statewide which is in violation of state law. The Supreme Court is using taxpayer money and Odyssey to compete against a Hoosier company who has the only system in Indiana that is connected statewide and still has 40 of the 82 counties despite the massive spending and unnecessary attacks

  5. Here's a recent resource regarding steps that should be taken for removal from the IN sex offender registry. I haven't found anything as comprehensive as of yet. Hopefully this is helpful - http://www.chjrlaw.com/removal-indiana-sex-offender-registry/

ADVERTISEMENT