OSC

OSC message Boards

As the home for independent and minor league sports, OurSports Central's message boards are the perfect place to discuss your favorite teams and leagues with other fans, players and team and league administrators. Our boards cover all the leagues represented on OSC including independent and minor league baseball, indoor and Arena football, outdoor and indoor lacrosse, mens and womens basketball, junior and minor league hockey, outdoor and indoor soccer and more. Before posting for the first time, please consult our FAQ. Contact us with any questions.

OurSports Central independent and minor league sports


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   IP: 132.9.127.7
Old 06-05-2008, 04:38 PM
AllAces AllAces is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Rapid City
Posts: 417
Default NIFL Wins in Court

Court says league not liable for Rapid City football player's injury

By Chet Brokaw, The Associated Press Thursday, June 05, 2008

The Rapid City Red Dogs, and not the National Indoor Football League, were responsible for providing workers' compensation coverage for an injured player, the South Dakota Supreme Court ruled Thursday. Circuit Judge Thomas L. Trimble had ruled the Red Dogs were responsible for providing workers' compensation coverage to Chad Carpenter, who sustained a neck injury in a game. The league was exempt from liability, the judge said.

The Supreme Court agreed that Carpenter was employed by the Red Dogs, not by the league, so the team was obligated to provide workers' compensation coverage.

Carpenter injured his neck on March 29, 2003, while playing in a regular season game for the Red Dogs. The injury prevented him from working for four weeks and cost him $5,462 in medical bills.

Neither the Red Dogs nor the league had workers' compensation insurance, so Carpenter sued both the team and the league. Judge Trimble determined that the Red Dogs were responsible for workers' compensation coverage.

The Supreme Court said Carpenter's employment contract was between him and the Red Dogs, and he was to be paid a weekly expense allowance and $200 a game. The team, not the league, paid Carpenter for regular season games, the justices said.

The league did not meet the legal definition of employer for regular season games, so it was not responsible for providing workers' compensation insurance, the high court said.

Carpenter contended that the league had an express or implied employment contract with him because it had control over the game, the Red Dogs and the players. But the Supreme Court said the league was not a joint employer because it had no obligation to pay Carpenter for regular season games.
Reply With Quote
  #2   IP: 64.12.117.206
Old 06-05-2008, 04:56 PM
gonzo13 gonzo13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Rome,Ga
Posts: 611
Send a message via Yahoo to gonzo13
Default

This will probably be the only time we ever hear about the NIFL winning a court battle.

.....I just wish this thing would go away once and for all.
__________________
Just when I thought I was out....They pull me back in.
Reply With Quote
  #3   IP: 68.117.4.90
Old 06-05-2008, 10:32 PM
preeths's Avatar
preeths preeths is offline
Administrator
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,455
Default

My thoughts exactly, gonzo13. One wonders what the league's liability would be if one of the injured players from the dozen or so CS/CG-controlled teams of last year sued the league.
__________________
OurSports Central - //www.oursportscentral.com
OSC on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/oursportscentral
OSC on Twitter: http://twitter.com/osctoday
Reply With Quote
  #4   IP: 132.9.127.6
Old 06-06-2008, 10:27 AM
AllAces AllAces is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Rapid City
Posts: 417
Default

I feel extremely bad for the player that signs on in good faith and gets taken advantage of. Everyone knows it wasn't his responsibilty to carry his own insurance, but no one will step up and do the right thing.

To be honest, though, I am surprised anyone even showed up to represent the league in the appeal.
Reply With Quote
  #5   IP: 132.9.127.6
Old 06-06-2008, 10:32 AM
AllAces AllAces is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Rapid City
Posts: 417
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzo13 View Post
.....I just wish this thing would go away once and for all.
You have to admit that the boards are a lot quiter without these idiots doing stupid things publicly. If you wanted entertainment and passion (although very negative), they produced.
Reply With Quote
  #6   IP: 208.240.243.170
Old 06-06-2008, 01:03 PM
Rocky's Avatar
Rocky Rocky is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 168
Default

AllAces, who owned the dogs that that point? I don't remember.
__________________
Q. What is the fastest way to become a millionare?
A. Be a multi-millionare and buy a minor league sports franchies.
Reply With Quote
  #7   IP: 24.214.205.158
Old 06-06-2008, 01:05 PM
gonzo13 gonzo13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Rome,Ga
Posts: 611
Send a message via Yahoo to gonzo13
Default

The board may not be as busy, and we may not be quite as entertained by all of their jackassery, but the sport is better off.
__________________
Just when I thought I was out....They pull me back in.
Reply With Quote
  #8   IP: 72.22.22.2
Old 06-10-2008, 10:53 PM
robertboyd's Avatar
robertboyd robertboyd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 100
Send a message via AIM to robertboyd Send a message via Yahoo to robertboyd
Default

I wonder if the court was aware that the NIFL business agreement with the teams are/were not legal, and if this would have changed the outcome.
Reply With Quote
  #9   IP: 74.248.237.33
Old 06-11-2008, 12:29 AM
Kearupt's Avatar
Kearupt Kearupt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 35
Post

Am I remembering wrong? Didn't the NIFL require the member teams to sign with a league provided carrier?
I wonder if the court knew that (if correct), and if that would have changed the ruling?
Reply With Quote
  #10   IP: 216.46.98.249
Old 06-23-2008, 11:57 AM
Trainwreck Trainwreck is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearupt View Post
Am I remembering wrong? Didn't the NIFL require the member teams to sign with a league provided carrier?
I wonder if the court knew that (if correct), and if that would have changed the ruling?
I'm not sure that it would have mattered. They're saying he was technically an employee of the team so the team was the one responsible for the insurance. Now if the team had paid the league for the insurance and THOUGHT that their players were covered, then I would assume the team would have a good basis for a civil suit against the league (good luck with that).

At any rate, I'm guessing that the total sum we're talking about is $6262 ($5,462 in medical bills and 4 x $200 per week in salary). I would guess that the legal bills were at least that much for each side. Not really in anybody's interest to pursue it much more.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Hapening ImgHappening Now