Court decides which temporary co-workers and subsidiaries or loaning employers an injured man may sue

In Castell v. Peckover Metal, et al., the injured truck driver sued a number of people after a load of metal was dropped on his leg.  Castell testified that the temp workers loading his trailer at Thyssen Krupp Logistics "didn't have a clue on how to load his trailer," and that their employers should be held accountable for hiring and assigning incompetent persons to work with unfamiliar machinery.

The Court held that the various subsidiaries of Thyssen Krupp were protected from a negligence action because they were part of the "horizontal" organization of Castell's employer and therfore entitled to the exclusive remedy protection of the workers compensation statute.  So, they aren't Castell's employer for purposes of the IRS or worker/employee protections, but they are still entitled to the protections afforded in the event of injury to an "employee."

The Court held that Kelly Services may be sued for negligently providing borrowed employees who were insufficiently trained, if Kelly's actions constituted a breach of ordinary care. Since Kelly surrendered control of the employees on the job site, it was not vicariously liable for their negligence, but it could be found liable if it's various breaches of MiOSHA and OSHA documented ordinary negligence.