Midsouth and Nivert, having faced negligence and other claims by Mason, a worker supplied by temporary employment agency PeopleReady, appealed for summary judgment, claiming immunity under exclusive-remedy provisions of the Act. They emphasized that Mason, while performing flagging duties exclusively at Midsouth's sites, was a "special employee" of theirs, making them her "special employer" and thus immune from the tort actions she brought. They presented substantial evidence, including employment agreements and indirect funding for Mason’s workers' compensation insurance to reinforce this claim.
Mason, having suffered severe injuries due to an accident while on duty, argued against being a special employee, citing her status as an independent contractor and an explicit labor-supply agreement between PeopleReady and Midsouth, stating temporary associates were solely employees of PeopleReady. Mason’s assertion of her intention to be solely a PeopleReady employee and not a Midsouth employee was significantly challenged by her duties, conducted under Midsouth’s direction, and the evidence of implied consent to a contract of hire with Midsouth. The court, emphasizing the actual service provision and the established contractual agreements, deemed these as paramount, establishing her consent to the associated risks and responsibilities with Midsouth, thus validating the exclusive-remedy provisions and indemnifying Midsouth and Nivert against Mason's claims.
Court Sides with Defendant in Workplace Injury Case, Granting Immunity Under Workers' Compensation Act
Court Upholds Dismissal of Plaintiff's Claims against Employer on Grounds of Expiry and Lack of Evidence
Defendant's Petition for Dismissal of Plaintiff's Claims Denied by Court
Court Reverses Ruling on Defendant's Status as Employer's Agent in Plaintiff's Accident Case
Interpretation of "Employer" under the Workers' Compensation Act Challenges Defendant's Claim to Immunity
Defendant's Mandamus Petition Denied: Alleged Post-Accident Negligence Not Covered by Workers' Compensation Exclusivity Provisions
Court Upholds City of Muscle Shoals' Claim to Immunity Over Gattman Park Injury
Tenax Granted Immunity in Worker's Injury Lawsuit due to Alabama Workers' Compensation Act
Court Reverses Denial of Summary Judgment, Finds Uninstalled Safety Saw Does Not Equate to Removal of a Safety Guard
Rock Wool Asserts Worker's Injury Claims Barred by Workers' Compensation Act, Countering Casons' Suit under Employer's Liability Ac
Court Rules on Dismissal and Jury Trial Issues in Workplace Assault Case
TDY Employee's Injury Lawsuit Faces Jurisdiction Challenge on Appeal After Key Counts Dismissed by Trial Court.
Court Debates Enforceability of Unapproved Workers' Compensation Settlement After Employee's Death
Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals Limited to Workers' Compensation Remedies
Plaintiff Appealed a Summary Judgment in Favor of APCo on Claims of Negligence and Wantonness
Tort Claims Against Special Employer are Barred by Exclusive-Remedy Provision of the Act
No Evidence of Toxicity Exposure or Work-Related Disease
Procedural Dispute of Proper Court to review Exclusivity Provisions
Administrative Rule deemed Willful Conduct: Claim Allowed under Exclusive Remedy Provisions
Release of Claims Under Workers' Compensation Act does not include Claims Based on Willful Removal of Safety Devicee
Court Reverses Dismissal of Injured Worker's Tort Claims Related to Post-Accident Care
Tenax Granted Immunity in Worker's Injury Lawsuit due to Alabama Workers' Compensation Act
Court Reverses Denial of Summary Judgment, Finds Uninstalled Safety Saw Does Not Equate to Removal of a Safety Guard
Rock Wool Asserts Worker's Injury Claims Barred by Workers' Compensation Act, Countering Casons' Suit under Employer's Liability Ac
Court Rules on Dismissal and Jury Trial Issues in Workplace Assault Case
TDY Employee's Injury Lawsuit Faces Jurisdiction Challenge on Appeal After Key Counts Dismissed by Trial Court.
A Prolonged Battle Over Workers' Compensation and Negligence Claims
Plaintiff Appealed a Summary Judgment in Favor of APCo on Claims of Negligence and Wantonness
Tort Claims Against Special Employer are Barred by Exclusive-Remedy Provision of the Act
Procedural Dispute of Proper Court to review Exclusivity Provisions
Release of Claims Under Workers' Compensation Act does not include Claims Based on Willful Removal of Safety Devicee