Napper v. ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding whether entity is statutory employee under workers’ compensation law is a mixed question of law and fact
• explaining that “other party” language in Code § 65.2-309, which reflects preservation of an injured employee’s right to bring a civil action against a stranger to the employment relationship, is the inverse of being a statutory employee
• distinguishing Fowler in part because the call-center business did not receive customers in its office or work with the janitorial company to clean its own premises
• listing the specificities of performance in a cleaning contract, including which rooms were to be cleaned on which days and even ensuring certain listed products like “Windex, Clorox, toilet paper and paper towel[s]” were in each room (alteration in original)
• “While janitorial services may be considered essential to every business in the Commonwealth for obvious reasons, it does not follow that janitorial services are an essential part of every employer’s particular trade, business or occupation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).