TONY WAYNE WILSON v. BILL JENNINGS, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A B &L CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND WAYNE NEELEY (TWCA March 7, 2012)
Pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51, this workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
In this case, the employee alleged that he was working as a carpenter for the defendant, Wayne Neeley, when he fell from the roof of a house and seriously injured his right ankle. Neeley denied that he was the employer and also denied that he was a subcontractor for the defendant, B & L Construction, the general contractor.
The trial court held that the employee was employed by Neeley and that Neeley was a subcontractor of B & L Construction. Because Neeley did not have workers’ compensation insurance, the trial court found B & L Construction liable for workers’ compensations benefits pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-113 and awarded both temporary total disability benefits and accrued medical expenses, but nothing else.
On appeal, the employee contends that the trial court erred by failing to award permanent disability benefits and future medical benefits. In response, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by awarding temporary disability benefits. We hold that the trial court properly awarded temporary total benefits, but erred by failing to award permanent disability benefits and future medical benefits to the employee. The judgment is reversed in part and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/wilsont_030712.pdf
Showing posts with label Contractor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Contractor. Show all posts
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Court reviews whether a contractor can be held liable for injuries incurred in a car accident
JOSHUA N. LEE, v. LYONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. (Tenn. Ct. App. January 10, 2012)
Plaintiff and others sustained injuries in a single car accident and sued defendant construction company and the Tennessee Department of Transportation, alleging that defendant construction company had recently completed work on that section of the highway where the accident occurred, and that a low point in the pavement caused plaintiff to lose control of his vehicle and wreck. Defendant answered, stating that they had completed the required construction on that section of the highway, and the State had accepted its work pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 12-4-501 et seq. which provides upon proper completion of the work the contractor "is discharged from all liability to any party". Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment which the Trial Court granted and plaintiff appealed. We hold that summary judgment for the defendant in this case was proper, and affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2012/leej_011012.pdf
Plaintiff and others sustained injuries in a single car accident and sued defendant construction company and the Tennessee Department of Transportation, alleging that defendant construction company had recently completed work on that section of the highway where the accident occurred, and that a low point in the pavement caused plaintiff to lose control of his vehicle and wreck. Defendant answered, stating that they had completed the required construction on that section of the highway, and the State had accepted its work pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 12-4-501 et seq. which provides upon proper completion of the work the contractor "is discharged from all liability to any party". Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment which the Trial Court granted and plaintiff appealed. We hold that summary judgment for the defendant in this case was proper, and affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2012/leej_011012.pdf
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Court reviews a jury's allocation of fault and jury instructions in a case involving an injury that occurred at a construction site
BENJAMIN INDOCCIO v. M&A BUILDERS, LLC, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. November 15, 2011)
This appeal arises from injuries Plaintiff sustained after falling down a staircase while working on the construction of a home. Plaintiff filed a negligence action against the general contractor and the subcontractor responsible for the construction of the custom staircase. The matter was tried before a jury, and the jury returned a verdict finding Plaintiff fifty percent at fault, the subcontractor thirty-five percent at fault, and the general contractor fifteen percent at fault.
After his motion for new trial was denied, Plaintiff filed this appeal. Plaintiff asserts that the trial court erred by excluding evidence that the subcontractor's employees used marijuana while working on the construction of the staircase, and erred by excluding evidence of misdemeanor convictions and probation violations of one of the subcontractor's employees. Plaintiff also asserts that the trial court erroneously instructed the jury regarding notice, negligence, and foreseeability.
After thoroughly reviewing the record, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the evidence of alleged marijuana use or the evidence of misdemeanor convictions and probation violations. Similarly, we find that the jury instructions on notice, negligence, and foreseeability were proper. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/indocciob_111511.pdf
This appeal arises from injuries Plaintiff sustained after falling down a staircase while working on the construction of a home. Plaintiff filed a negligence action against the general contractor and the subcontractor responsible for the construction of the custom staircase. The matter was tried before a jury, and the jury returned a verdict finding Plaintiff fifty percent at fault, the subcontractor thirty-five percent at fault, and the general contractor fifteen percent at fault.
After his motion for new trial was denied, Plaintiff filed this appeal. Plaintiff asserts that the trial court erred by excluding evidence that the subcontractor's employees used marijuana while working on the construction of the staircase, and erred by excluding evidence of misdemeanor convictions and probation violations of one of the subcontractor's employees. Plaintiff also asserts that the trial court erroneously instructed the jury regarding notice, negligence, and foreseeability.
After thoroughly reviewing the record, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the evidence of alleged marijuana use or the evidence of misdemeanor convictions and probation violations. Similarly, we find that the jury instructions on notice, negligence, and foreseeability were proper. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/indocciob_111511.pdf
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
TWCA Reviews Whether an Independent Contractor is Entitled to Workers’ Compensation Benefits
JOSEPH SCOTT RICHARDSON v. JAMES BROWN CONTRACTING, INC. d/b/a JAMES BROWN TRUCKING COMPANY ET AL (TWCA August 18, 2010)
The owner and operator of a tractor-trailer filed a workers' compensation claim against a common carrier for injuries that he incurred while attempting to verify a load to transport to another location. The trial court ruled that the owner/operator, while an independent contractor, was entitled to workers' compensation benefits by virtue of a written contract between the parties extending coverage, as permitted by statute. The trial court reserved judgment on the award and permitted an interlocutory appeal.
The Supreme Court granted the appeal and referred it to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3) and Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. Because the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of fact made by the trial court, the judgment is affirmed. The cause is remanded to the trial court for the disposition of the remaining issues.
Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/richardsonj_081810.pdf
The owner and operator of a tractor-trailer filed a workers' compensation claim against a common carrier for injuries that he incurred while attempting to verify a load to transport to another location. The trial court ruled that the owner/operator, while an independent contractor, was entitled to workers' compensation benefits by virtue of a written contract between the parties extending coverage, as permitted by statute. The trial court reserved judgment on the award and permitted an interlocutory appeal.
The Supreme Court granted the appeal and referred it to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3) and Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. Because the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of fact made by the trial court, the judgment is affirmed. The cause is remanded to the trial court for the disposition of the remaining issues.
Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/richardsonj_081810.pdf
Labels:
Contractor,
Interlocutory appeal,
TWCA,
Workers' Compensation
Friday, February 26, 2010
Court holds Defendant had no duty of care in wrongful death action
JOHNNY R. OWNBY ET AL. v. TENNESSEE FARMERS COOPERATIVE CORPORATION, U.S.A. (Tenn. Ct. App. May 18, 2009)
This wrongful death action arises out of an accident at an agricultural facility: a worker fell through a skylight on the roof while employed by a company hired by the agricultural facility owner to do work on the roof. The trial court denied the owner's motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether the owner owed a duty of care to the injured worker. We reverse the decision of the trial court because we have concluded that this case falls within an exception to the general duty of a landowner to provide a reasonably safe workplace.
The full text of this opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/ownbyj_051909.pdf
This wrongful death action arises out of an accident at an agricultural facility: a worker fell through a skylight on the roof while employed by a company hired by the agricultural facility owner to do work on the roof. The trial court denied the owner's motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether the owner owed a duty of care to the injured worker. We reverse the decision of the trial court because we have concluded that this case falls within an exception to the general duty of a landowner to provide a reasonably safe workplace.
The full text of this opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/ownbyj_051909.pdf
Labels:
Accident,
Construction,
Contractor,
Negligence,
OSHA,
Slip and Fall,
TN Court of Appeals,
Wrongful Death
Thursday, January 28, 2010
TCA Considers Owner Liability for Construction Contractor Employee’s Death
JOHNNY R. OWNBY ET AL. v. TENNESSEE FARMERS COOPERATIVE CORPORATION, U.S.A. (Tenn. Ct. App. May 19, 2009).
This wrongful death action arises out of an accident at an agricultural facility: a worker fell through a skylight on the roof while employed by a company hired by the agricultural facility owner to do work on the roof. The trial court denied the owner's motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether the owner owed a duty of care to the injured worker. We reverse the decision of the trial court because we have concluded that this case falls within an exception to the general duty of a landowner to provide a reasonably safe workplace.
The full text of this opinion can be found at the TBA website.
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/ownbyj_051909.pdf
This wrongful death action arises out of an accident at an agricultural facility: a worker fell through a skylight on the roof while employed by a company hired by the agricultural facility owner to do work on the roof. The trial court denied the owner's motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether the owner owed a duty of care to the injured worker. We reverse the decision of the trial court because we have concluded that this case falls within an exception to the general duty of a landowner to provide a reasonably safe workplace.
The full text of this opinion can be found at the TBA website.
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/ownbyj_051909.pdf
Labels:
Construction,
Contractor,
Repair,
TN Court of Appeals,
TOSHA,
Wrongful Death
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)