Categories: ArticlesFirm News

Victory in Court of Appeals For Small Business Owner

Ogborn Mihm, LLP partner Thomas Neville obtained a victory for their client, Visible Voices, Inc., over the Division of Unemployment Insurance in a recent Colorado Court of Appeals decision, Visible Voices, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of the State of Colorado and Division of Unemployment Insurance, 2014 COA 63.  The Division of Unemployment Insurance commenced an audit of a small business, Visible Voices, Inc., that provides instant speech-to-text translation known in the court reporting industry as Computer Assisted Realtime Translation (“CART”).  The Division determined that Visible Voices owed back unemployment insurance taxes on 13 workers it determined were “employees” of Visible Voices.  Visible Voices appealed the determination, citing facts that showed the workers were independent contractors who undertook performance of engagements on a limited basis when the Visible Voices owner was unable to perform the services requested of her clients due to a scheduling conflict.

Court of Appeals

The case was heard by two different hearing officers, and twice by the ICAO before going up on appeal to the Court of Appeals.  In the Court of Appeals decision, it sided with Visible Voices, holding that the ICAO inappropriately relied on a single-factor test to determine whether the pool of workers Visible Voices occasionally gave work to were independent contractors.  Notably, the Court of Appeals cited with approval to Softrock Geological Services, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 2012 COA 97, for the proposition that a single-factor test is inappropriate to determine whether a worker is customarily engaged in an independent trade or business related to the services performed.

This Court of Appeals decision was bolstered a few days later by the Colorado Supreme Court’s twin decisions in Industrial Claim Appeals Office v. Softrock Geological Services, Inc., 2014 CO 30, and Western Logistics, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 2014 CO 31, which also rejected a single-factor test for purposes of determining whether an individual is an independent contractor under the Colorado Employment Security Act.

Published by
Ogborn Mihm LLP

Recent Posts

Colorado’s New Consumer Protection Laws: Why They Matter to Lawyers and the Public

Every year, legislatures pass dozens of new laws. Most have relatively narrow applications or affect…

1 month ago

Is Colorado a No-Fault State? How Car Accident Claims Work

Colorado is not a no-fault state. It operates under an at-fault (tort) system, meaning the…

2 months ago

Non-Pecuniary vs. Pecuniary Losses: What They Mean for Your Case

Terms such as pecuniary losses and non-pecuniary losses can feel technical and unfamiliar, particularly at…

2 months ago

Traumatic Brain Injury Diagnosis: What Doctors Look For

In Denver, people spend significant time on the road, at work, and in active environments.…

3 months ago

Can You Sue Someone for a Sports Injury in Colorado?

Yes, potentially. In some cases, injuries result from unsafe conditions, reckless conduct, or failures in…

3 months ago

What Is the Average Settlement for a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in Denver?

There is no true or single average settlement for a traumatic brain injury (TBI) in…

3 months ago