§
Subdivision 1.Liability for payment of compensation.
Where a subcontractor fails to comply with this chapter, the general contractor, or intermediate contractor, or subcontractor is liable for payment of all compensation due an employee of a subsequent subcontractor who is engaged in work upon the subject matter of the contract.
§
Subd. 1a.Enforcement of order.
If the compensation judge orders the general contractor, intermediate contractor, or subcontractor to pay compensation benefits, the award issued against the general contractor, intermediate contractor, or subcontractor constitutes a lien for government services under section 514.67 on all property of the general contractor, intermediate contractor, or subcontractor and is subject to the provisions of the Revenue Recapture Act under chapter 270A. The special compensation fund may enforce the terms of the award in the same manner as a district court judgment.
§
Subd. 2.Subrogation.
A person who has paid compensation under this section is subrogated to the rights of the injured employee against the employee's immediate employer, or any person whose liability for compensation payment to the employee is prior to the liability of the person who paid it.
§
Subd. 3.Determination of respective liabilities.
The Workers' Compensation Division may determine the respective liabilities of persons under this section.
Notes of Decisions
Giersdorf v. A & M Constr., Inc., 820 N.W.2d 16 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 7× “Minn. Stat. § 176.215 , subd. 3 (2010). The circumstances contemplated by section 176.”
Klemetsen v. Stenberg Const. Co., Inc., 424 N.W.2d 70 (Minn. 1988).
· cites it 24× “The court of appeals held that a general contractor, who is liable for workers’ compensation benefits to an uninsured subcontractor’s employee under Minn.Stat. § 176.215 (1982), is not immune from a wrongful death action on behalf of the heirs of the subcontractor’s deceased…”
O'MALLEY v. Ulland Bros., 549 N.W.2d 889 (Minn. 1996).
· cites it 4× “] It may be that public policy would be better served by according immunity to common-law *904 liability to any contractor or subcontractor who is subject to liability for the payment of all compensation due the employee of an uninsured subcontractor pursuant to Minn.Stat. §…”
Klemetsen v. Stenberg Const. Co., Inc., 415 N.W.2d 887 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 52× “1) or whether Stenberg Construction Company is an intermediate or general contractor and should pay (Minn.Stat. § 176.215, subd. 1). 5. Stenberg Construction Company was an intermediate or general contractor on [the date of the accident].”
Weme v. Lastavica, 458 N.W.2d 404 (Minn. 1990).
· cites it 12× “Paul under Minn.Stat. § 176.215, subd. 1 (1988). 1 We affirm.”
Hallas v. Naegele Outdoor Advert., Inc., 541 N.W.2d 594 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 8× “Hallas, as mentioned, is already entitled to workers’ compensation coverage as an employee of Johnson Billboard. If Johnson Billboard were to fail to provide coverage, Naegele would be statutorily liable for such benefits even in the absence of an agreement to provide them.”
Moorhead v. Grassle, 93 N.W.2d 678 (Minn. 1958).
· cites it 3× “1 They assert that under this test § 176.215, subd. 1, does not apply for the reason that the tearing down of the old buildings was not a part of the regular business of the Carlton Hotel.”
Ritter v. M.A. Mortenson Co., 352 N.W.2d 110 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “The appellant received workers’ compensation benefits from Mortenson’s carrier pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 176.215 (1982), since H.D. had failed to obtain the proper coverage for its employees.”
Zak v. Gypsy, 279 N.W.2d 60 (Minn. 1979).
· cites it 2× “There shall be no payment from the special compensation fund if there is liability for the injury under the provisions of section 176.215, by an insurer or self-insurer.”
Guhlke v. Roberts Truck Lines, 128 N.W.2d 324 (Minn. 1964).
“12 If a manufacturer who places his product in the hands of a common carrier for delivery is to be held liable for workmen’s compensation for the benefit of the carrier’s employees or their dependents, such policy should be fixed by the legislature and not by this court.”
May v. ISD 115, 922 N.W.2d 208 (Minn. 2019).
· cites it 4× “Nevertheless, she argues, the District is responsible to pay compensation benefits because the District is a statutory employer under Minn. Stat. § 176.215 (2018). Under the statute, general *209 contractors are liable for benefits when their "subcontractor" fails to provide…”
Minnesota Workers� Comp. Assigned Risk Plan as administered by RTW, Inc. v. Dimas Reyes, Advanced Designs Siding & Roofing, Inc., L M G Constr., Inc., Robert Garza, Jr., Jose Luis Gonzalez-Cervantes, Michelle Rivera, Special Comp. Fund (Minn. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “” Minn. Stat. § 176.215 , subd. 1 (2014). Reyes cross-claimed for negligence.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.