The Kentucky Court of Appeal ruled that a taxi driver was not entitled to workers' compensation benefits after he became paraplegic from being shot in the back.
Daoud Oufafa worked under an agreement with Taxi 7 to make weekly lease payments and vehicle insurance in exchange for the company providing a fully equipped cab, dispatch services and credit card handling services and its trademark, according to documents in AIG v. Oufafa, filed December 10, in Frankfort, Kentucky.
The agreement also allowed Mr. Oufafa to rent out the cab and related services in the second place with Taxi 7's approval. He also received a document entitled "Self-Employed Status." It stated that by signing, Oufafa acknowledged that there was no relationship between him and Taxi 7, either express or implied, between him and Taxi 7, according to documents.
Mr. Oufafa signed the documents and included a written statement that "I am self-employed for all purposes, including work injury compensation and unemployment. Whether I drive the hired TAXICAB or not, I am not employed by the company."
An administrative court judge later ruled that Mr. Oufafa was an independent entrepreneur and dismissed the claim. Workers & # 39; The Compensation Board later ruled that the ALJ erred in concluding that Taxi 7 was a rental company rather than a cab company and that this "impaired his entire analysis." to analyze the degree of control Taxi 7 had over him in relation to the company's regular operations.
The court ruled that the right to control an employee is a key factor in determining whether an employment relationship exists, and the ALJ found that this factor weighed in to find that Mr. Oufafa was an independent contractor because Taxi 7 did not have the right to control its daily work and did not do so.
WorkCompCentral is a sister publication of Företagsförsäkring. More stories here .