Skip to main content

K & D Auto Body, Inc. v. Division of Employment Security

Mo. Ct. App.August 16, 2005No. No. WD 64400Cited 15 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Ellis, Smart, Ulrich
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed the Commission's determination that K & D Auto Body's tow truck drivers were employees rather than independent contractors under Missouri Employment Security Law, rejecting K & D's appeal based on the common law right-to-control test and IRS twenty-factor analysis.

What This Ruling Means

**What happened:** K & D Auto Body, a company that operates tow trucks, tried to classify its tow truck drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. The Missouri Division of Employment Security disagreed and said the drivers should be considered employees. This classification matters because employees are entitled to unemployment benefits and other protections that independent contractors don't receive. K & D appealed this decision to court. **What the court decided:** The appellate court sided with the Division of Employment Security. The court used two tests to make this determination: the "common law right-to-control test" and the "IRS twenty-factor analysis." Both tests look at how much control the company has over workers and how they perform their jobs. The court found that K & D had enough control over the tow truck drivers to make them employees, not independent contractors. **Why this matters for workers:** This ruling protects workers from being misclassified by their employers. When companies incorrectly label employees as independent contractors, workers lose access to unemployment benefits, workers' compensation, and other employment protections. This decision reinforces that courts will look at the actual working relationship, not just what the employer calls it, when determining worker status.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.