Samuel Amos v. David E. Tidwell and State of Alaska, Workers' Compensation Benefits Guaranty Fund

Summary

The court reversed the Commission’s decision because it improperly created a friendship-based exemption from workers’ compensation coverage and misapplied the productive/consumptive distinction to Tidwell’s employment of Amos. The court held that the Commission could not make new factual findings or speculate about statutory and regulatory exemptions when the Board had not made the necessary findings. The case was remanded for the Board to determine whether Tidwell employed Amos in connection with a business or industry. No separate opinions were filed.