Hudnall v. S W Construction Co.

15 Citing cases

  1. Scott v. Amec Kamtech, Inc.

    583 F. Supp. 2d 912 (E.D. Tenn. 2008)   Cited 2 times
    In Scott v. AMEC Kamtech, Inc., 583 F. Supp.2d 912, 917 (E.D. Tenn. 2008), the plaintiff, a citizen of Tennessee, was injured while working as a millwright for a Tennessee subcontractor on a construction project in Texas.

    The question remains whether a Tennessee court would join in this majority approach. The only case in Tennessee to deal with the exclusive remedy provision of the workers' compensation act in the context of an injury in a foreign state is Hudnall v. S W Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 451 S.W.2d 858 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1969). In Hudnall, a Tennessee general contractor hired a Tennessee subcontractor to construct silos at Natchez, Mississippi.

  2. Fugunt v. Tennessee Valley Authority

    545 F. Supp. 977 (E.D. Tenn. 1982)   Cited 4 times

    TVA is therefore immune in this case if it is found to be the principal contractor. Hudnall v. S W Construction Co. of Tennessee, Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 451 S.W.2d 858 (1969); Bristol Telephone Co. v. Weaver, 146 Tenn. 511, 243 S.W. 299 (1921) (third party is subject to suit). The Tennessee cases construing section 50-915's "principal contractor" provision are not dispositive of the issue before the Court in the present case, as the Tennessee courts have not passed upon this precise issue.

  3. Darnell v. Royal Sunalliance

    No. M2002-00617-WC-R3-CV (Tenn. Aug. 26, 2003)

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and his employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 451 S.W.2d 858, 865 (1969); Mitchell v. United States Fidelity and Guar. Co., 206 F. Supp. 489, 490 (Tenn. 1962).

  4. Maxwell v. State Farm Fire

    No. M2002-02750-WC-R3-CV (Tenn. Aug. 4, 2003)

    The rule applies even if the subcontractor is an independent contractor or an employer of less than five regular employees. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 451 S.W.2d 858 (1969); Brown v. Canterbury Corp., 844 S.W.2d 134, 136 (Tenn. 1992). Considering those principals, we cannot say that the facts and inferences to be drawn from those facts would permit a reasonable person to reach only one conclusion.

  5. Martin v. Norris Son

    No. M2002-00711-WC-R3-CV (Tenn. May. 23, 2003)

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and his employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 451 S.W.2d 858 (1969). The Act is in the nature of an insurance policy, Hughes v. Elliott, 162 Tenn. 188, 35 S.W.2d 387 (1931), and an action to recover the benefits provided therein is an action on a contract.

  6. Crisp v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

    No. M2002-01236-WC-R3-CV (Tenn. May. 2, 2003)

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and his employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 451 S.W.2d 858, 861-862 (1969). The Act expressly requires that it be given "equitable construction" and declares itself to be a remedial Act.

  7. Winningham v. Findlay Indus.

    No. M2002-02059-WC-R3-CV (Tenn. Apr. 30, 2003)   Cited 1 times
    Concluding that there is "no such thing as a motion to clarify" under Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 59 and 60

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and his employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 451 S.W.2d 858 (1969). The entire workers' compensation system of law is statutory. Vinson v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co., Inc., 655 S.W.2d 931, 933 (Tenn.

  8. McBroom v. Owens-Corning Corp.

    No. W2002-01146-SC-WCM-CV (Tenn. Mar. 18, 2003)

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and her employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 751, 451 S.W.2d 858, 862 (1969). Injuries by accident arising out of and in the course of employment which cause either disablement or death of the employee are compensable. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-103(a).

  9. Devers v. Aqua Glass Corporation

    No. W2001-02832-SC-WCM-CV (Tenn. Feb. 27, 2003)

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and his or her employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 451 S.W.2d 858 (1969). The entire workers' compensation system of law is statutory.Vinson v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co., Inc., 655 S.W.2d 931, 933 (Tenn.

  10. Bland v. American Freightways Co.

    No. W2002-01122-WC-R3-CV (Tenn. Feb. 4, 2003)

    Such statutes are part of the contract of employment and the rights and responsibilities of such injured employee and his employer can only be ascertained from a consideration of those statutes as construed by the courts. Hudnall v. S. W. Constr. Co. of Tenn., Inc., 60 Tenn. App. 743, 751, 451 S.W.2d 858, 862 (1969). Injuries by accident arising out of and in the course of employment which cause either disablement or death of the employee are compensable. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-103(a).