A. Every employer subject to the compensation provisions of this title shall insure the payment of compensation to his employees in the manner hereinafter provided. While such insurance remains in force he or those conducting his business shall only be liable to an employee for personal injury or death by accident to the extent and in the manner herein specified.
B. To ensure that all employers who are required to have workers' compensation insurance under this title have notice of such requirement, the appropriate official of a county, city, or town who licenses employers to conduct business under Chapter 37 (§ 58.1-3700 et seq.) of Title 58.1 or the State Corporation Commission who charters employers to conduct business under § 12.1-12 shall provide employers requesting such licenses or charters on and after January 1, 1989, with information concerning statutory requirements for such insurance coverage. The Workers' Compensation Commission shall prepare such information and distribute it to such licensing or chartering officials. The failure of the local official or the State Corporation Commission to give such notice to an employer shall not relieve the employer of the duty of acquiring insurance as required by this title.
C. As used in this section, the words "those conducting his business" shall include any person whose act results in an injury or death compensable under this title and arises out of and in the course of employment by an employer who is or may be liable for the payment of compensation. A person other than an employer or statutory employer, or a person employed by either, whose acts result in such injury or death shall be deemed an "other party" within the meaning of § 65.2-309.
Code 1950, § 65-99; 1968, c. 660, § 65.1-103; 1977, c. 113; 1988, c. 543; 1991, c. 355.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case:
Turf Care, Inc. v. Henson, 657 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
Turf Care, Inc. v. Henson, 657 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 15× “In addition, Turf Care contends the commission erred in finding it failed to comply with its obligation to provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage pursuant to Code § 65.2-800. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, and reverse in part the commission’s decision.”
Employers Resource Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. James, 853 F. Supp. 920 (E.D. Va. 1994).
· cites it 6× “5 After McNutt’s claim was filed, the Commission determined that neither ERM nor All-American had complied with Va.Code §§ 65.2-800 and 65.2-801 which obligate Virginia employers to provide either workers’ compensation insurance or security for self-insurance.”
Ballweg v. Crowder Contracting Co., 440 S.E.2d 613 (Va. 1994).
· cites it 2× “See Code §§ 65.2-800 and -801. 8 Almost as an aside, Crowder suggests that to compel the Commonwealth to pay benefits to Ballweg fosters a religious faith, in violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.”
Wade v. Scott Recycling, L.L.C., 89 Va. Cir. 319 (Roanoke County Cir. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 5× “” Va. Code Ann. § 65.2-800 . This provision notes that, by providing the required insurance for employees, the employer is greatly limited in his liability for an employee’s injury or death.”
Penn-Am. Ins. Co. v. White Pines, Inc., 387 F. Supp. 3d 646 (E.D. Va. 2019).
· cites it 2× “Therefore, to grant the declaratory judgment sought by Penn-America, the Court must engage in numerous factual findings: that the underlying tort arose out of the employment relationship between Polli and White Pines, that Polli is an employee as defined by the statute, that…”
Buettner v. Super Laundry Mach., 857 F. Supp. 471 (E.D. Va. 1994).
“at § 65.2-800(A) (emphasis added). The Act defines “those conducting [the employer’s] business” as “any person whose act results in an injury [that] arises out of and in the course of employment by an employer who is or may be hable for the payment of compensation.”
Kilmer v. Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc., 82 F. Supp. 2d 568 (W.D. Va. 1999).
· cites it 4× “2d 453, 455 (1985); see also Va.Code Ann. § 65.2-800(A) (West 1999) (stating the employer or “those conducting his business shall only be liable to the employee for personal injury .”
Salazar v. Ballesteros, 981 F. Supp. 960 (E.D. Va. 1997).
· cites it 2× “See Va.Code Ann. § 65.2-800 (Michie 1995) (stating that employer "or those conducting his business” shall be liable to employee for personal injury or death to the extent provided by the Act).”
Fose v. Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd., 67 Va. Cir. 347 (Portsmouth Cir. Ct. 2005).
· cites it 3× “) An “other party” was further defined by Va. Code § 65.2-800 on August 5, *356 2000, as follows: “[a] person other than an employer or statutory employer, or a person employed by either, whose acts result in such injury or death shall be deemed an ‘other party’ within the…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 65.2-800(A) — 7 cases
Turf Care, Inc. v. Henson, 657 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
“In addition, Turf Care contends the commission erred in finding it failed to comply with its obligation to provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage pursuant to Code § 65.2-800. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, and reverse in part the commission’s decision.”
Buettner v. Super Laundry Mach., 857 F. Supp. 471 (E.D. Va. 1994).
“at § 65.2-800(A) (emphasis added). The Act defines “those conducting [the employer’s] business” as “any person whose act results in an injury [that] arises out of and in the course of employment by an employer who is or may be hable for the payment of compensation.”
Kilmer v. Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc., 82 F. Supp. 2d 568 (W.D. Va. 1999).
“2d 453, 455 (1985); see also Va.Code Ann. § 65.2-800(A) (West 1999) (stating the employer or “those conducting his business shall only be liable to the employee for personal injury .”
— Va. Code Ann. § 65.2-800(C) — 3 cases
Kilmer v. Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc., 82 F. Supp. 2d 568 (W.D. Va. 1999).
“2d 453, 455 (1985); see also Va.Code Ann. § 65.2-800(A) (West 1999) (stating the employer or “those conducting his business shall only be liable to the employee for personal injury .”
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.