Wolf v. Kajima Intern. Inc.
| Decision Date | 07 March 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 86S05-9403-CV-221,86S05-9403-CV-221 |
| Citation | 629 N.E.2d 1237 |
| Parties | Gary R. WOLF, Appellant (Plaintiff Below), v. KAJIMA INTERNATIONAL INC., Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc., Isuzu Motors America, Inc. d/b/a Isuzu Motors Limited, and Fuji Heavy Industries, Ltd., Appellees (Defendants Below). |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
In this case, Gary R. Wolf, appellant-plaintiff below, was badly injured in an on-the-job accident. Wolf was an employee of C.J. Rogers ("Rogers"), a subcontractor of Kajima International Inc., the general contractor on a major construction project for Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc. ("SIA"). Although Rogers had worker's compensation insurance in force at the time of the accident, the insurance had been procured and paid for by SIA.
We grant transfer to adopt and incorporate by reference 1 the holding of the Court of Appeals that an owner or general contractor does not alter its status concerning potential tort liability to employees of contractors or subcontractors by directly purchasing worker's compensation insurance on behalf of subcontractors. Wolf v. Kajima International (1993), Ind.App., 621 N.E.2d 1128, 1132.
In this case, SIA argued that the Court of Appeals decision, when read together with Lackey v. DuHadway Co. (1990), Ind.App., 560 N.E.2d 671, trans. denied, would reward contractors for failing to comply with the Indiana Worker's Compensation act. Ind.Code Sec. 22-3-2-2 et seq. (Burns 1992 and Supp.1993). Lackey involved an injured employee of a subcontractor which did not carry worker's compensation insurance. In that case, the Court of Appeals held that when the employee elected to seek worker's compensation from the general contractor, "he surrendered his option to seek and collect a tort remedy against all parties liable for his worker's compensation." Lackey at 673. Although Judge Rucker ably distinguished the factual and procedural situation in Lackey from that in this case, we acknowledge the inconsistency identified by SIA and hereby disapprove Lackey to the extent that it is inconsistent with the holding set forth in the preceding paragraph.
1 Pursuant to Appellate Rule 11(B)(3).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Bd. of Accounts v. Indiana University Foundation
... ... Zeedyk (1993), Ind.App., 625 N.E.2d 1249, 1251, trans. denied; Wolf v. Kajima Int'l, Inc. (1993), Ind.App., 621 N.E.2d 1128, 1130, adopted ... ...
-
Rausch v. Reinhold
...judgment with this interlocutory appeal. 2. Lackey has previously been rejected in part by our supreme court. In Wolf v. Kajima Int'l, Inc., 629 N.E.2d 1237 (Ind.1994), the supreme court adopted a court of appeals decision, 621 N.E.2d 1128 (Ind.Ct.App.1993), holding that an owner or general......
-
McQuade v. Draw Tite, Inc.
...GMC, Inc. (1994), Ind., 637 N.E.2d 1282; and actions against general contractors by employees of subcontractors, Wolf v. Kajima International, Inc. (1994), Ind., 629 N.E.2d 1237.4 Defendant does not claim that it had an express or implied employment contract with Plaintiff. Rather, its clai......
-
Greyhound Financial Corp. v. R.L.C., Inc., 11A01-9311-CV-371
... ... Wolf v. Kajima Int'l, Inc. (1993), Ind.App., 621 N.E.2d 1128, 1130, adopted (1994), Ind., 629 N.E.2d ... ...