The Supreme court ruled the client company WAS NOT COVERED by the temporary agency policy.
Here's the quote:
"But even if Interim were contractually obligated to obtain workers’ compensation insurance that named Exel as an insured, or it gratuitously chose to do so, no such policy has been identified or made part of this record. Accordingly, Exel has not established that it is “covered by workers’ compensation insurance coverage” for a “work-related injury sustained by the employee,” in this case, Garza, which is a prerequisite to the application of the exclusive remedy provision in section 408.001(a)."
If I were an employer and did not have workers compensation coverage for my employees, I would be very careful in hiring temporary employees. If you hire temporary workers AND direct their action while at your site, this decision could have a great impact on your operation. This case is not over in terms of whether the client company will be required to pay for the employee injuries. It is over in terms of whether Exel is covered by the temporary agency's workers compensation insurance.
Here's the complete Supreme Court decision:
Jose Garza, Petitioner, v.
Exel Logistics, Inc. and Interim Services Pacific LLC, Respondents