Any person, firm, or corporation creating or carrying into operation any scheme, artifice, or device to enable him or her, them, or it to execute work without being responsible to the workers for the provisions of the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act shall be included in the term employer, and with the immediate employer shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation herein provided for and be subject to all the provisions of such act. This section, however, shall not be construed as applying to an owner who lets a contract to a contractor in good faith, or a contractor, who, in good faith, lets to a subcontractor a portion of his or her contract, if the owner or principal contractor, as the case may be, requires the contractor or subcontractor, respectively, to procure a policy or policies of insurance from an insurance company licensed to write such insurance in this state, which policy or policies of insurance shall guarantee payment of compensation according to the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act to injured workers.
Notes of Decisions
Martinez v. Cmr Constr. & Roofing of Texas, 302 Neb. 618 (Neb. 2019).
· cites it 20× “CMR challenges the compensation court's determination under § 48-116 of what constitutes the term "employer" and alleges the compensation court lacked personal jurisdiction over Texas Mutual Insurance Company (Texas Mutual), a workers' compensation insurance company domiciled…”
Aboytes-Mosqueda v. LFA Inc., 306 Neb. 277 (Neb. 2020).
· cites it 17× “Aboytes-Mosqueda claims that LFA should be considered a statutory employer pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-116 (Reissue 2010). The court considered the evidence presented - 279 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 306 Nebraska Reports ABOYTES-MOSQUEDA v.”
Kohout v. Bennett Constr., 296 Neb. 608 (Neb. 2017).
· cites it 14× “Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-116 (Reissue 2010), a contractor’s act of engaging a subcontractor without actually compelling the subcontractor to acquire workers’ compensation insurance constitutes a device to escape liability under the Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Act.”
Rogers v. Hansen, 317 N.W.2d 905 (Neb. 1982).
· cites it 13× “, is liable as a statutory employer under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-116 (Reissue 1978). The defendant Management, Inc.”
Mendoza v. Omaha Meat Processors, 408 N.W.2d 280 (Neb. 1987).
· cites it 4× “2d 156 (1983): Employer contended that a third party was a statutory employer, see Neb.Rev.Stat. § 48-116 (Reissue 1984), and, therefore, jointly and severally liable for payments due an injured employee, but this court reasoned that the employer's contention "would not in any…”
Duffy Bros. Constr. Co. v. Pistone Builders, Inc., 299 N.W.2d 170 (Neb. 1980).
· cites it 5× “Spencer, after an award by the Workmen’s Compensation Court which found Duffy and Pistone jointly liable for benefits, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §48-116 (Reissue 1978). Duffy assigns that the court was in error in failing to find that the plaintiff was entitled to be…”
Keith v. Wilson, 84 N.W.2d 192 (Neb. 1957).
· cites it 40× “The plaintiff insists on the other hand that Kiewit became liable under the terms of section 48-116, R.R.S.1943, as follows: "Any person, firm or corporation creating or carrying into operation any scheme, artifice or device to enable him, them or it to execute work without…”
Franklin v. Pawley, 340 N.W.2d 156 (Neb. 1983).
· cites it 6× “§ 48-116 (Reissue 1978) is whether the work being done by the independent contractor would ordinarily be done by employees of the owner in view of the owner’s past practices and the practices of employers in comparable businesses.” (Emphasis supplied.) (Syllabus of the court.”
Gardner v. Kothe, 109 N.W.2d 405 (Neb. 1961).
· cites it 8× “The plaintiff’s theory of the case is that the defendant is liable as a statutory employer under section 48-116, R. R. S. 1943, because of his failure to require Noble to carry compensation insurance.”
Dobesh v. Associated Asphalt Contractors, Inc., 292 N.W. 59 (Neb. 1940).
· cites it 12× “This appeal presents two questions: (1) Is a municipal corporation liable for compensation under section 48-116, Comp. St. 1929, to an employee of a contractor, where it has not required the contractor to carry compensation insurance? (2) If so, is the employee’s right to…”
Schweitzer v. Am. Nat'l Red Cross, 591 N.W.2d 524 (Neb. 1999).
· cites it 2× “” In paragraph 7 she alleged, inter alia, that she was a “statutory employee” of Shrine Temple “pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §48-116 [Reissue 1998].” Chapter 48 contains Nebraska’s *352 workers’ compensation statutes, which provide for the handling of claims by “employees” for…”
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.