Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Roger Davis, 683 F.3d 651

Serrato died after falling through a hole on a Davis Construction site where he worked on a framing crew.
Underlying wrongful death and related claims were brought against Davis Construction and Tommy Richie Construction, LLC.
Mid-Continent sought a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to indemnify Davis Construction under its policy because Serrato allegedly was an employee.
The Serratos intervened in Mid-Continent's suit, and the district court conducted a bench trial on employee vs independent contractor status.
Policy exclusions d and e potentially apply if Serrato was an employee; the district court determined Serrato was an independent contractor.
The district court’s analysis hinged on Texas Limestone five-factor test to distinguish employee from independent contractor, reviewing findings for clear error and applying de novo review to legal conclusions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was Serrato an independent contractor or employee under Texas law?	Serrato was independent contractor; Davis had limited control.	Serrato was Davis Construction's employee; policy exclusions apply.	Serrato was an independent contractor.
Did the district court properly apply the Limestone five-factor test under Texas law?	All five factors support independent-contractor status, particularly control and payment.	Some factors could support employee status; the court erred in weighing them.	District court did not abuse its discretion; four factors weigh for independent contractor.
Is the district court's factual support for the Limestone factors susceptible to clear error review on appeal?	Findings are supported by testimony showing lack of employer control.	Some testimony suggests control, which could undermine independence.	No clear error; the overall record supports independent-contractor conclusion.

Limestone Prod. Distrib. Inc. v. McNamara, 71 S.W.3d 308 (Tex. 2002) (five-factor test for employee vs. independent contractor; right to control focus)
Anchor Cas. Co. v. O.E. Hartsfield, 390 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. 1965) (worker control over means and details; independent contractor indicators)
Halliburton v. Texas Indem. Ins. Co., 213 S.W.2d 677 (Tex. 1948) (pay structure factors in independent-contractor analysis)
Amerisure Ins. Co. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 445 F. App’x 756 (5th Cir. 2011) (unpublished; apply Limestone factors and deference to district court findings)
Rodriguez v. Sarabyn, 129 F.3d 760 (5th Cir. 1997) (employee vs. independent-contractor analysis; rights to control)
Musser Davis Land Co. v. Union Pac. Res., 201 F.3d 561 (5th Cir. 2000) (diversity-law approach; Texas employee definitions applied)