Ask Your Legal Question. Legal Experts Answer You ASAP.

(Not a Legal Question?)

im an independent contractor. i never bothered with ...

Sent to Legal Experts June 27 08:46 PM

im an independent contractor. i never bothered with comp because i have no employees but carriy liability ins. if i am on a new constr. jos site and i get hurt because of negligence on the generals employees behalf, did i sign away my rights to a settlement, above the 15000 cap?

 

Optional Information:
pueblo, Colorado

Customer (name blocked for privacy)
Reply
June 28 1:08 PM (16 hours and 17 minutes and 13 seconds later)
         
Reply to P-Leagle's Post: Betrayed: A Chieftain Investigative Series, View the full list of articles and more.
Pueblo painter at center of worker's comp ruling
By CHARLES ASHBY
CHIEFTAIN DENVER BUREAU
DENVER - Independent contractors who choose not to have workers' compensation coverage are subject to a $15,000 damage cap in injury claims, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Using the case of a Pueblo painter as its guide, the high court said independent contractors who otherwise would have a compensable claim under the state's workers' compensation laws but voluntarily choose not to be covered cannot later claim to be excluded from the damage limit.

As a result of the decision, the court ruled its decision to be "absolute," meaning trial court judges must follow the rule in subsequent workers' comp claims.

The unanimous ruling stems from a Pueblo District Court case filed by Pueblo painter Gordon Pulsifer.

Pulsifer, who did not provide workers compensation insurance for himself, was hired by Pueblo Professional Contractors Inc. as a subcontractor to work on the construction of the Stonegate Village Apartments in Pueblo.

He was injured on the job site when he stepped on stairs that slipped away from the building, causing him severe injuries and substantial medical expenses, according to the ruling.

Pueblo District Judge Rosalie Vigna ruled in his favor, but the high court's decision reversed that ruling.

The court explained that under the Colorado Workers' Compensation Act, there are three groups of workers who have no cause for legal action in claims - independent contractors, a working general partner or sole proprietor and a corporate officer or member of a limited liability company.

The court said that while there is a provision exempting some from the $15,000 damage cap, it doesn't apply to any of those groups unless they expressly opt in and pay for coverage themselves.

"Pulsifer argues that, if the statute were read to statutorily limit his damages, an employer could negligently injure a sole proprietor or independent contractor at a work-site, but only have to pay $15,000 for his negligent act," Justice Alex Martinez, formerly a Pueblo District judge, wrote in the unanimous opinion. "The damage caused could put a small business person completely out of business and cause them to lose everything.

"The General Assembly’s response, harsh though it may seem to those subject to the statute's limits, is that, if a sole proprietor wants to avoid such consequences, they are responsible for insuring against those consequences themselves," the ruling adds. "Constrained by the language of the statute, we cannot, absent constitutional infirmities, alter the General Assembly's expressed intent to allow such outcomes to prevail."

Previous Next

Back to top

Email Print
Save Popular


Discuss this article in our forums!
TopJobs
Administrative support. Good communication skills with the ability t
Immediate positions availabel at Residential Treatment Center. Experi
Physical Therapist wanted for Clinic Director position in Trinida
Ads


TopHomes
Subscribe
Click here to get your Southern Colorado news!

Advertising
Begin here to get the word out about your business!

Classifieds
Start here to place an ad whatever your needs are!

The View
One click to read The Pueblo West View Online!




ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Home Contact Us Metro/Region National Sports Business Editorial Life
Please send us your comments and suggestions
or e-mail our Webmaster.archive
Privacy Statement/Terms of Use ©1996-2007 www.chieftain.com
Star-Journal Publishing Corp.
Pueblo, Colorado U.S.A.


140th Year... and still on the job! Wednesday June 27, 2007

Sections:
Home
Metro/Region
National
Sports
Business
Life
Editorial
Classifieds
Obituaries
Newspaper Ads
Vital Statistics
Online Forums
Crossword
Comics
Games
Weather
Archives
Real Estate Locator
Special Sections
Daily Photos
Daily Headlines
RSS Feed
My Chieftain
Search: ?

Recent Issues:
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
View Date: ?

Classifieds:
Announcements
Automotive
Employment
Farm & Ranch
Finance
Merchandise
Real Estate
Service Directory
Garage Sale Map
Place an Ad
E-Mail Notifier
Services:
Contact Us
About this site
Newspapers in Education
Subscriber Services
Delivery Rates
Advertising
Advertising Rates
Contest Rules
Activities:
Spring Run Off
State Fair
Colorado State Fair Express
Pueblo Zoo
About Pueblo:
Pueblowest View
RE/MAX of Pueblo
Business Directory
Destination Pueblo
Medal of Honor
Pueblo Chamber
Pueblo Latino Chamber
Youth:
School District 60
School District 70
Pueblo Library District
Pueblo Community College
CSU-Pueblo
73° Mostly Cloudy more »


ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Betrayed: A Chieftain Investigative Series, View the full list of articles and more.
Pueblo painter at center of worker's comp ruling
By CHARLES ASHBY
CHIEFTAIN DENVER BUREAU
DENVER - Independent contractors who choose not to have workers' compensation coverage are subject to a $15,000 damage cap in injury claims, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Using the case of a Pueblo painter as its guide, the high court said independent contractors who otherwise would have a compensable claim under the state's workers' compensation laws but voluntarily choose not to be covered cannot later claim to be excluded from the damage limit.

As a result of the decision, the court ruled its decision to be "absolute," meaning trial court judges must follow the rule in subsequent workers' comp claims.

The unanimous ruling stems from a Pueblo District Court case filed by Pueblo painter Gordon Pulsifer.

Pulsifer, who did not provide workers compensation insurance for himself, was hired by Pueblo Professional Contractors Inc. as a subcontractor to work on the construction of the Stonegate Village Apartments in Pueblo.

He was injured on the job site when he stepped on stairs that slipped away from the building, causing him severe injuries and substantial medical expenses, according to the ruling.

Pueblo District Judge Rosalie Vigna ruled in his favor, but the high court's decision reversed that ruling.

The court explained that under the Colorado Workers' Compensation Act, there are three groups of workers who have no cause for legal action in claims - independent contractors, a working general partner or sole proprietor and a corporate officer or member of a limited liability company.

The court said that while there is a provision exempting some from the $15,000 damage cap, it doesn't apply to any of those groups unless they expressly opt in and pay for coverage themselves.

"Pulsifer argues that, if the statute were read to statutorily limit his damages, an employer could negligently injure a sole proprietor or independent contractor at a work-site, but only have to pay $15,000 for his negligent act," Justice Alex Martinez, formerly a Pueblo District judge, wrote in the unanimous opinion. "The damage caused could put a small business person completely out of business and cause them to lose everything.

"The General Assembly’s response, harsh though it may seem to those subject to the statute's limits, is that, if a sole proprietor wants to avoid such consequences, they are responsible for insuring against those consequences themselves," the ruling adds. "Constrained by the language of the statute, we cannot, absent constitutional infirmities, alter the General Assembly's expressed intent to allow such outcomes to prevail."

Previous Next

Back to top

Email Print
Save Popular


Discuss this article in our forums!
TopJobs
Administrative support. Good communication skills with the ability t
Immediate positions availabel at Residential Treatment Center. Experi
Physical Therapist wanted for Clinic Director position in Trinida
Ads


TopHomes
Subscribe
Click here to get your Southern Colorado news!

Advertising
Begin here to get the word out about your business!

Classifieds
Start here to place an ad whatever your needs are!

The View
One click to read The Pueblo West View Online!




ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

140th Year... and still on the job! Wednesday June 27, 2007

Sections:
Home
Metro/Region
National
Sports
Business
Life
Editorial
Classifieds
Obituaries
Newspaper Ads
Vital Statistics
Online Forums
Crossword
Comics
Games
Weather
Archives
Real Estate Locator
Special Sections
Daily Photos
Daily Headlines
RSS Feed
My Chieftain
Search: ?

Recent Issues:
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
View Date: ?

Classifieds:
Announcements
Automotive
Employment
Farm & Ranch
Finance
Merchandise
Real Estate
Service Directory
Garage Sale Map
Place an Ad
E-Mail Notifier
Services:
Contact Us
About this site
Newspapers in Education
Subscriber Services
Delivery Rates
Advertising
Advertising Rates
Contest Rules
Activities:
Spring Run Off
State Fair
Colorado State Fair Express
Pueblo Zoo
About Pueblo:
Pueblowest View
RE/MAX of Pueblo
Business Directory
Destination Pueblo
Medal of Honor
Pueblo Chamber
Pueblo Latino Chamber
Youth:
School District 60
School District 70
Pueblo Library District
Pueblo Community College
CSU-Pueblo
73° Mostly Cloudy more »


ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Betrayed: A Chieftain Investigative Series, View the full list of articles and more.
Pueblo painter at center of worker's comp ruling
By CHARLES ASHBY
CHIEFTAIN DENVER BUREAU
DENVER - Independent contractors who choose not to have workers' compensation coverage are subject to a $15,000 damage cap in injury claims, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Using the case of a Pueblo painter as its guide, the high court said independent contractors who otherwise would have a compensable claim under the state's workers' compensation laws but voluntarily choose not to be covered cannot later claim to be excluded from the damage limit.

As a result of the decision, the court ruled its decision to be "absolute," meaning trial court judges must follow the rule in subsequent workers' comp claims.

The unanimous ruling stems from a Pueblo District Court case filed by Pueblo painter Gordon Pulsifer.

Pulsifer, who did not provide workers compensation insurance for himself, was hired by Pueblo Professional Contractors Inc. as a subcontractor to work on the construction of the Stonegate Village Apartments in Pueblo.

He was injured on the job site when he stepped on stairs that slipped away from the building, causing him severe injuries and substantial medical expenses, according to the ruling.

Pueblo District Judge Rosalie Vigna ruled in his favor, but the high court's decision reversed that ruling.

The court explained that under the Colorado Workers' Compensation Act, there are three groups of workers who have no cause for legal action in claims - independent contractors, a working general partner or sole proprietor and a corporate officer or member of a limited liability company.

The court said that while there is a provision exempting some from the $15,000 damage cap, it doesn't apply to any of those groups unless they expressly opt in and pay for coverage themselves.

"Pulsifer argues that, if the statute were read to statutorily limit his damages, an employer could negligently injure a sole proprietor or independent contractor at a work-site, but only have to pay $15,000 for his negligent act," Justice Alex Martinez, formerly a Pueblo District judge, wrote in the unanimous opinion. "The damage caused could put a small business person completely out of business and cause them to lose everything.

"The General Assembly’s response, harsh though it may seem to those subject to the statute's limits, is that, if a sole proprietor wants to avoid such consequences, they are responsible for insuring against those consequences themselves," the ruling adds. "Constrained by the language of the statute, we cannot, absent constitutional infirmities, alter the General Assembly's expressed intent to allow such outcomes to prevail."

Previous Next

Back to top

Email Print
Save Popular


Discuss this article in our forums!
TopJobs
Administrative support. Good communication skills with the ability t
Immediate positions availabel at Residential Treatment Center. Experi
Physical Therapist wanted for Clinic Director position in Trinida
Ads


TopHomes
Subscribe
Click here to get your Southern Colorado news!

Advertising
Begin here to get the word out about your business!

Classifieds
Start here to place an ad whatever your needs are!

The View
One click to read The Pueblo West View Online!




ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Home Contact Us Metro/Region National Sports Business Editorial Life
Please send us your comments and suggestions
or e-mail our Webmaster.archive
Privacy Statement/Terms of Use ©1996-2007 www.chieftain.com
Star-Journal Publishing Corp.
Pueblo, Colorado U.S.A.
Pueblo painter at center of worker's comp ruling
By CHARLES ASHBY
CHIEFTAIN DENVER BUREAU
DENVER - Independent contractors who choose not to have workers' compensation coverage are subject to a $15,000 damage cap in injury claims, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Using the case of a Pueblo painter as its guide, the high court said independent contractors who otherwise would have a compensable claim under the state's workers' compensation laws but voluntarily choose not to be covered cannot later claim to be excluded from the damage limit.

As a result of the decision, the court ruled its decision to be "absolute," meaning trial court judges must follow the rule in subsequent workers' comp claims.

The unanimous ruling stems from a Pueblo District Court case filed by Pueblo painter Gordon Pulsifer.

Pulsifer, who did not provide workers compensation insurance for himself, was hired by Pueblo Professional Contractors Inc. as a subcontractor to work on the construction of the Stonegate Village Apartments in Pueblo.

He was injured on the job site when he stepped on stairs that slipped away from the building, causing him severe injuries and substantial medical expenses, according to the ruling.

Pueblo District Judge Rosalie Vigna ruled in his favor, but the high court's decision reversed that ruling.

The court explained that under the Colorado Workers' Compensation Act, there are three groups of workers who have no cause for legal action in claims - independent contractors, a working general partner or sole proprietor and a corporate officer or member of a limited liability company.

The court said that while there is a provision exempting some from the $15,000 damage cap, it doesn't apply to any of those groups unless they expressly opt in and pay for coverage themselves.

"Pulsifer argues that, if the statute were read to statutorily limit his damages, an employer could negligently injure a sole proprietor or independent contractor at a work-site, but only have to pay $15,000 for his negligent act," Justice Alex Martinez, formerly a Pueblo District judge, wrote in the unanimous opinion. "The damage caused could put a small business person completely out of business and cause them to lose everything.

"The General Assembly’s response, harsh though it may seem to those subject to the statute's limits, is that, if a sole proprietor wants to avoid such consequences, they are responsible for insuring against those consequences themselves," the ruling adds. "Constrained by the language of the statute, we cannot, absent constitutional infirmities, alter the General Assembly's expressed intent to allow such outcomes to


Home Contact Us Metro/Region National Sports Business Editorial Life
Please send us your comments and suggestions
or e-mail our Webmaster.archive
Privacy Statement/Terms of Use ©1996-2007 www.chieftain.com
Star-Journal Publishing Corp.
Pueblo, Colorado U.S.A.
Think you can answer this question?
Login or Become an Expert

 

DISCLAIMER: You acknowledge that any information you may obtain from individuals you contact through use of the JustAnswer service comes from those individuals, not from JustAnswer, and that JustAnswer is not in any way responsible for any of the information these third parties may supply. The site and services are provided "as is" with no warranty and no representations are made regarding the qualification of an Expert. Responses and comments on JustAnswer are for general information and are not intended to substitute for informed professional advice (such as medical, legal, investment or accounting) and do not establish a professional-client relationship. JustAnswer is not intended or designed to address EMERGENCY QUESTIONS which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service.

JustAnswer > Legal