2005AP685 Acuity Mutual Insurance Company v. Olivas

Listen to this article

“That body of law applies to disputes between injured workers claiming they are entitled to compensation and employers (or the employers’ insurance carriers) who dispute that they owe compensation benefits. Here, on the other hand, we have a run-of-the-mill breach of contract dispute about whether a policyholder owes certain premiums. The mere fact that the policy provides worker’s compensation coverage does not change the nature of the dispute….

“This case does not involve burdening the victim of an accident with the task of proving his or her entitlement to compensation. Rather, the complaint is that Olivas had an

Acuity insurance policy under which he agreed to pay premiums and that he did not pay all of the required amounts. We see this case as a garden-variety breach-of-contract claim. In a breach-of-contract action, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the defendant violated the terms of the contract…. Acuity failed to establish that the other workers were employees and not self-employed contractors who happened to work as a team with Olivas. Because Olivas was not obligated to pay additional premiums for independent contractors, it could not make out a prima facie case for breach of contract. The trial court therefore was correct to conclude that Olivas should prevail.”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist II, Sheboygan County, Bolgert, J., Brown, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Daniel J. Flynn, Milwaukee

For Respondent: Paul Bugenhagen Jr., Waukesha; Ness Flores, Waukesha