Clark County v. State Industrial Insurance System
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
The issue presented is whether court reporters are properly categorized as “employees” of appellant, Clark County. We hold that they are not, and therefore reverse the district court decision requiring the payment of SIIS premiums by the County.
NRS 616.055 defines employee as “every person in the service of an employer under any appointment or contract of hire or apprenticeship. ...” Although this definition is to be construed broadly in order to effectuate the legislative purpose of assuring SIIS benefits, see, e.g., Antonini v. Hanna Industries, 94 Nev. 12, 573 P.2d 1184 (1978), we…
3Cases cited5 opinions
- Antonini v. Hanna IndustriesNevada Supreme Court · 1978
- Meers v. Haughton ElevatorNevada Supreme Court · 1985
- Whitley v. Jake's Crane & Rigging, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1979
- Matter of Compensation of HunterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
- Montgomery v. Ponderosa Constr., Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1985
4Cited by5 opinions
- Norton v. GilmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- State Industrial Insurance System v. E G & G Special ProjectsNevada Supreme Court · 1987
- Daniel M. Hundson Renee Hundson v. Action Building Systems, Francisco Reyes, and Does I-VCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Morsovillo v. Clark CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- No., Colorado Attorney General Reports2007