Workmen's Compensation — Insurance — Employer with two businesses, trucking and taxicab — Employes engaged in both activities — Injury while performing service for taxicab company — Separate policies for separate businesses issued by two insurers — Sole liability of insurer covering taxicab business.
In a workmen's compensation case, in which it appeared that the employer, engaged in the trucking business, took out a workmen's compensation policy issued by A insurance company in the name of the employer, doing business under a fictitious name; that thereafter the employer bought a taxicab service and B insurance company issued a standard workmen's compensation policy to the employer, trading under another fictitious name; that neither insurance company knew that the employer was engaged in any other business than the one referred to in their respective policies, and neither company knew of the existence of the other company's policy covering the employer; that the employer operated his trucking business and his taxicab business out of the same garage, where both the taxis and the trucks were serviced and repaired; that claimant and others were employed to repair and service both types of vehicles; that separate books were kept for each business and, as a matter of convenience, the wages of the maintenance men were charged against each business for alternate weeks, rather than for the work done for the particular business; that claimant was injured while working inside the garage on a taxicab tire; that B insurance company contended that both it and A insurance company should be held jointly liable; and that the court below affirmed the order of the board holding B insurance company solely liable; it was Held that the order of the court below should be affirmed.
Argued November 16, 1961.
OPINION PER CURIAM, December 14, 1961:
The order of the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge CLYDE S. SHUMAKER for the court below, reported at 25 Pa. D. C. 2d 499.