Meers test in Nevada

8 Nevada opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2015 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Nevada courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

Case	Followed	Cited
Meers v. Haughton Elevatorgreen nev · 1985 · cited in 6 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 1997–2015 2 sentences 2015The test (except in cases where the work is obviously a subcontracted fraction of a main contract) is whether that indispensable activity is, in that business, normally carried on through employees rather than independent contractors. 101 Nev. at 286 , 701 P.2d at 1007 (internal quotations omitted); see also Oliver v. Barrick Goldstrike Mines, 111 Nev. 1338, 1349 , 905 P.2d 168, 175 (1995) (holding that the "same trade" language in NRS 616.262, replaced by NRS 616B.603, refers to the Meers test). 2015The test (except in cases where the work is obviously a subcontracted fraction of a main contract) is whether that indispensable activity is, in that business, normally carried on through employees rather than independent contractors. 101 Nev. at 286 , 701 P.2d at 1007 (internal quotations omitted); see also Oliver v. Barrick Goldstrike Mines, 111 Nev. 1338, 1349 , 905 P.2d 168, 175 (1995) (holding that the "same trade" language in NRS 616.262, replaced by NRS 616B.603, refers to the Meers test).	5	6
Oliver v. Barrick Goldstrike Minesgreen nev · 1995 · cited in 5 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 1997–2015 2 sentences 2015The test (except in cases where the work is obviously a subcontracted fraction of a main contract) is whether that indispensable activity is, in that business, normally carried on through employees rather than independent contractors. 101 Nev. at 286 , 701 P.2d at 1007 (internal quotations omitted); see also Oliver v. Barrick Goldstrike Mines, 111 Nev. 1338, 1349 , 905 P.2d 168, 175 (1995) (holding that the "same trade" language in NRS 616.262, replaced by NRS 616B.603, refers to the Meers test). 2015The test (except in cases where the work is obviously a subcontracted fraction of a main contract) is whether that indispensable activity is, in that business, normally carried on through employees rather than independent contractors. 101 Nev. at 286 , 701 P.2d at 1007 (internal quotations omitted); see also Oliver v. Barrick Goldstrike Mines, 111 Nev. 1338, 1349 , 905 P.2d 168, 175 (1995) (holding that the "same trade" language in NRS 616.262, replaced by NRS 616B.603, refers to the Meers test).	5	5
Tucker v. Action Equipment & Scaffold Co.green nev · 1997 · cited in 4 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 1997–2015 2 sentences 2015See Tucker, 113 Nev. at 1357 , 951 P.2d at 1032 (holding that the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 9M10 court should analyze an independent contractor's work under NRS 616B.603 and the Meers test to determine whether it is a statutory employee for workers' compensation purposes); Meers, 101 Nev. at 286 , 701 P.2d at 1007 (explaining that the test for finding statutory employment is not whether the independent contractor's activity. "is useful, necessary, or even absolutely indispensable to the statutory employer's business" but rather whether the contracted services are, in the purported st 2015See Tucker, 113 Nev. at 1357 , 951 P.2d at 1032 (holding that the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 9M10 court should analyze an independent contractor's work under NRS 616B.603 and the Meers test to determine whether it is a statutory employee for workers' compensation purposes); Meers, 101 Nev. at 286 , 701 P.2d at 1007 (explaining that the test for finding statutory employment is not whether the independent contractor's activity. "is useful, necessary, or even absolutely indispensable to the statutory employer's business" but rather whether the contracted services are, in the purported st	3	4
Hays Home Delivery, Inc. v. Employers Insurance Co. of Nevadagreen nev · 2001 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015 2 sentences 2015Co. of Nev., 117 Nev. 678, 682 , 31 P.3d 367, 369-70 (2001) (noting that NRS 616B.603 codifies the Meers test, discussed below, which is used to "determine[ whether independent contractors are 'employees' under the NIIA"). 2015Co. of Nev., 117 Nev. 678, 682 , 31 P.3d 367, 369-70 (2001) (noting that NRS 616B.603 codifies the Meers test, discussed below, which is used to "determine[ whether independent contractors are 'employees' under the NIIA").	2	2
State Industrial Insurance System v. Ortega Concrete Pumping, Inc.green nev · 1997 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015 2 sentences 2015In Ortega, this court found the district court's failure to apply the Meers test was error, and we reversed and remanded so that it could apply the proper analysis. 113 Nev. at 1364 , 951 P.2d at 1036 . 2015In Ortega, this court found the district court's failure to apply the Meers test was error, and we reversed and remanded so that it could apply the proper analysis. 113 Nev. at 1364 , 951 P.2d at 1036 .	1	2
Sims v. General Telephone & Electronicsgreen nev · 1991 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 2 sentences 2006NRS 616B.603 was formerly located at NRS 616.262. [23] See Tucker, 113 Nev. at 1356 n. 4, 951 P.2d at 1031 -32 n. 4 (recognizing that, under the now defunct control test and under the Meers test, whether a matter was construction or nonconstruction impacted the ease of determining whether a defendant was entitled to NIIA immunity as a statutory employer or co-employee, and citing Sims v. General Telephone & Electronics, 107 Nev. 516 , 529 n. 6, 815 P.2d 151 , 159 n. 6 (1991) ("In non-construction situations such as this case, however, this court has taken a much more fact-specific approach to 2006NRS 616B.603 was formerly located at NRS 616.262. [23] See Tucker, 113 Nev. at 1356 n. 4, 951 P.2d at 1031 -32 n. 4 (recognizing that, under the now defunct control test and under the Meers test, whether a matter was construction or nonconstruction impacted the ease of determining whether a defendant was entitled to NIIA immunity as a statutory employer or co-employee, and citing Sims v. General Telephone & Electronics, 107 Nev. 516 , 529 n. 6, 815 P.2d 151 , 159 n. 6 (1991) ("In non-construction situations such as this case, however, this court has taken a much more fact-specific approach to	1	1
Willison v. Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc.green nev · 1993 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995 2 sentences 1995See Willison v. Texaco Ref. & Mktg., 109 Nev. 141 , 848 P.2d 1062 (1993); SIIS v. E G & G Special Projects, 103 Nev. 289 , 738 P.2d 1311 (1987). 1995See Willison v. Texaco Ref. & Mktg., 109 Nev. 141 , 848 P.2d 1062 (1993); SIIS v. E G & G Special Projects, 103 Nev. 289 , 738 P.2d 1311 (1987).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

Case	Cited	Years
McDowell Construction Supply Corp. v. Williams neutral nev · 1974 2 sentences 1997Is responsible for payment to any contracted subcontractors or independent contractors. 6 While NRS 616.262(3) exempted principal contractors from application of NRS 616.262(1) (the Meers test), we conclude that for immunity purposes, the term “principal contractor” encompasses subcontractors, sub-subcontractors and independent contractors. 7 To the extent that McDowell Construction Supply v. Williams, 90 Nev. 75 , 518 P.2d 604 (1974) (a construction case that adopts the control test), 1358 Leslie v. J. 1997Is responsible for payment to any contracted subcontractors or independent contractors. 6 While NRS 616.262(3) exempted principal contractors from application of NRS 616.262(1) (the Meers test), we conclude that for immunity purposes, the term “principal contractor” encompasses subcontractors, sub-subcontractors and independent contractors. 7 To the extent that McDowell Construction Supply v. Williams, 90 Nev. 75 , 518 P.2d 604 (1974) (a construction case that adopts the control test), 1358 Leslie v. J.	1	1997–1997
Leslie v. J. A. Tiberti Construction Co. green nev · 1983 2 sentences 1997A. Tiberti Construction, 99 Nev. 494 , 664 P.2d 963 (1983) (a construction case that articulates the five-factor analysis required in the control test), and their progeny are inconsistent with this opinion, they are hereby overruled. 1997A. Tiberti Construction, 99 Nev. 494 , 664 P.2d 963 (1983) (a construction case that articulates the five-factor analysis required in the control test), and their progeny are inconsistent with this opinion, they are hereby overruled.	1	1997–1997
State Industrial Insurance System v. E G & G Special Projects green nev · 1987 2 sentences 1995See Willison v. Texaco Ref. & Mktg., 109 Nev. 141 , 848 P.2d 1062 (1993); SIIS v. E G & G Special Projects, 103 Nev. 289 , 738 P.2d 1311 (1987). 1995See Willison v. Texaco Ref. & Mktg., 109 Nev. 141 , 848 P.2d 1062 (1993); SIIS v. E G & G Special Projects, 103 Nev. 289 , 738 P.2d 1311 (1987).	1	1995–1995

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603 (7) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616A.210 (6) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616A.020 (4) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.612 (4) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616C.215 (4) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 624.020 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check