Legal Opinion · Dissent

UNINSURED EMPLOYERS'S FUND v. Lutter

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 8, 1996No. 58, Sept. Term, 1995Published

1DissentKarwacki, Judge

The majority holds today that an officer of a close corporation who deliberately fails to purchase workers’ compensation insurance for himself cannot thereafter collect benefits from the State Uninsured Employers’ Fund when the officer is injured on the job. I respectfully dissent.

The majority’s holding directly contravenes the express language of the statute governing coverage under the Act of close corporation officers, in order to achieve a result which is admittedly more desirable but nonetheless incorrect. Moreover, the contrived and internally contradictory reasoning by which the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Amalgamated Casualty Insurance v. HelmsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
  2. Fairbanks v. McCarterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Collier v. ConnolleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1979
  4. Gregg v. GreggCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1952
  5. Inner Harbor Warehouse, Inc. v. MyersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API