Court Opinion

ID: 9529875
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:55:02.829066+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:56.712480
License: Public Domain

MEMMOTT, District Judge,
concurring in part and concurring in the dissenting opinion of
HOWE, Justice:
I concur in the lead opinion that the Workers’ Compensation Act does not preclude an employee of a special employer who is injured by a loaned employee from bringing an *465action against a general employer. I believe this result is dictated by existing statutes and prior ease law. However, I also concur with Justice Howe’s dissenting opinion, in which he finds no need to remand this case on the respondeat superior issue. There is no need to remand this ease for further district court proceedings. The trial court has made adequate findings, and the record is sufficient. Under either the “whose business” test or the “right of control” test set forth in the lead opinion, Kunz’s respondeat superior action against Beneficial would fail.