A.L. WILLIAMS & ASSOCIATES; MASSACHUSETTS INDEMNITY AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, COUNTER-DEFENDANTS,
v.
RANDY STELK; TIMOTHY HUNTER; WILLARD H. COLSON, JR., D/B/A MID-AMERICAN INVESTORS, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, COUNTER-CLAIMANTS, INVESTORS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEBRASKA, DEFENDANT, AMERISHARE INVESTORS, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT; A.L. WILLIAMS & ASSOCIATES, INC., MASSACHUSETTS INDEMNITY AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFFS, COUNTER-DEFENDANTS, APPELLEES, V. RANDY STELK, TIMOTHY HUNTER, DEFENDANTS, COUNTER-CLAIMANTS, APPELLANTS, WILLARD H. COLSON, JR., D/B/A MID-AMERICAN INVESTORS, DEFENDANT, COUNTER-CLAIMANT, APPELLANT, INVESTORS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEBRASKA, DEFENDANT, COUNTER-DEFENDANT, AMERISHARE INVESTORS, INC., DEFENDANT, COUNTER-DEFENDANT, APPELLANT

11th Cir. | 1993-02-08
Nos. 89-8765, 90-8855
Before COX and DUBINA, Circuit Judges, and GODBOLD, Senior Circuit Judge.
984 F.2d 391 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1993)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The court reversed the judge of compensation claims' finding that a confidential informant was an independent contractor, holding that the record lacked competent, substantial evidence to support this conclusion.


Holding

The court held that the record contained insufficient competent, substantial evidence to support the judge of compensation claims' finding that the claimant was an independent contractor while working as a confidential informant.


Facts & Procedural History

A claimant, injured during his full-time employment, also worked part-time as a confidential informant for a narcotics task force. The judge of compen…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT:

BY THE COURT: Appellants’ and appellees’ joint motion to dismiss the appeal and to vacate the May 18, 1992 (and January 14, 1993) opinions is GRANTED. The May 18, 1992 panel opinion, published at 960 F. 2d 942 (11th Cir.1992), and the January 14, 1993 (slip, page 784) opinions are VACATED. The judgment of the district court is VACATED and the ease is REMANDED to the district court with instruction that the case be dismissed. United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw