Falconi v. Coombs & Coombs, Inc., 387, 2005
In a worker's compensation action, although substantial evidence in the record supports the Industrial Accident Board's factual findings in a judgement in favor of defendant-employer, the Board erred in its application of the law to the facts. Applying Restatement (Second) of Agency Section 220, plaintiff was an employee, not an independent contractor, eligible for worker's compensation benefits.
- Decided 07/14/2006
- Published 07/14/2006
- RIDGELY, Justice., Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, BERGER, JACOBS, and RIDGELY, Justices, constituting the Court en Banc.
- Supreme Court of Delaware
- For Appellant:
- Perry F. Goldlust, Esquire, of Aber, Goldlust, Baker & Over, Wilmington, Delaware for Appellant.
- For Appellees:
- Susan A. List, Esquire, of Tybout, Redfearn & Pell, Wilmington, Delaware for Appellee.