WPCZ 1?l+0Gl7cͤ촋&5-2BQn`P.L 1WE#7b@ћJ]>30{OqJlO~r&<ȍ V'rfcV+KkA v@Xy_]$#++~E`o"R̓#`e"bYu4F Z 0(i  w@  UN U:F  U: UB %           B! ! ! ! ! D3> > > 0Dq q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q AO  0D D/ B=RC&3|x($ DDӀ X@XXXXX@   Ad FILED   March15,1999  CecilCrowson,Jr. AppellateCourt  Clerk (hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular  X@XXX X X@   Ad FILED     March09,1999  CecilCrowson,Jr.   AppellateCourt  Clerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX d%%%%'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !    TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7z XXdXXd7X`"XXXXX`"r*<,(j 8 `@E  tt0"Hrr *<,(j 8 `@E  tt0"Hr񀀀@j j  INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @>>%ATKNOXVILLE JOHND.HOWELL, <     )C/ANO.03A019810CV00340    4    <     ) 4 PlaintiffAppellant, <     )BRADLEYCIRCUIT   4    <     )v. 4    <     )HON.LAWRENCEH.PUCKETT,    4    <     )JUDGEDEANCHASE,d/b/aCHASE    )   HEATINGANDAIRCONDITIONING,)AFFIRMED 4    <     )AND 4 DefendantAppellee.    )REMANDED  PHILLIPL.DAVIDSON,Nashville,forPlaintiffAppellant.J.CHRISTOPHERCLEM,LUTHERANDERSON,PLLP,Chattanooga,forDefendantAppellee.@% OPINION  #  4    <      D   Franks,J. 4  Inthisactionplaintiffsueddefendantfortortiousinjuriesallegedlyoccurring atChaseHeatingandAirConditioning.PlaintiffhadrecoveredWorkersCompensationbenefitsfromSteveMann,d/b/aMannMechanicalContracting,whointervenedinthisaction.TheTrialCourt,respondingtoamotionforsummaryjudgment,granteddefendantsummaryjudgmentonthebasisthatChasewasastatutoryemployerpursuanttoT.C.A.506108and506112. 4  Thisistheissuetoberesolvedonappeal. 4  Summaryjudgmentsareonlygrantedwherethemovantestablishestherearenogenuineissuesofmaterialfact,andthemovantisentitledtoajudgmentasamatteroflaw.Byrdv.Hall,847S.W.2d208(Tenn.1993). ;34  4  Thematerialfactsarenotindispute.Plaintiff,atthetimeofhisallegedinjury,wasanemployeeofSteveMann,d/b/aMannMechanicalContracting.Atsometimepriortotheaccident,Mannhadbeenanemployeeofdefendant,butatthetimeoftheaccidenttheirworkingrelationshiphadchanged,andthedefendantsaidinhisdepositionthatMannwasa subcontractor.Atthetimeofplaintiffsallegedaccident,Mannwasrentingtrucks,equipmentandthesheetmetalshopfromdefendant.Thetrucksanduniformswornbytheworkerscarrieddefendantslogo.Defendantstestimonyisnotdisputedonthebusinessrelationship.Hetestified:0 4 0 4(#4(#Q.0 (# (#Okay.Whatwasthebusinessrelationshipatthetimeofthe  accidentinJuneof1994withMr.HowellbetweenyouandMr.  (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#A.0 (# (#Mann. (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#Q.0 (# (#Mann? (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#A.0 (# (#Well,IwasjustsubcontractingIrentedallofthetrucksandthe  sheetmetalshoptohim.Andhewasandpaidhimhesubcontractedallmylaborandinstallations.Ipaidhimbythejob.  (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#Q.0 (# (#Didthatbusinessrelationshiphaveanythingtodowithyour # workerscompinsurance?  (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#A.0 (# (#Well,Ididntcarryit.Thatwaspartofthedeal,hecarriedthe & workmanscomphimself,andtheinsuranceonthemenbackthere.AndIcarrieditonmine,ontheservicepeople.AndIpaidhimsomuchpermanhour,whichincludedwehaditfiguredtowherehecouldcomeoutbypayinghisinsurance,becausehisinsurancewasoverhead.  (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#Q.0 (# (#Whenyousaycomeout,toyoumeancomeoutbetter?-&& (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#A.0 (# (#Yeah,hecomeoutbetter,himself./(( (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#Q.0 (# (#Well,andbetterforyou,too?1** (# (# 0 4 0 4(#4(#A.0 (# (#Well,hopeditworkedthatway.3,, (# (#  4  PlaintiffarguesthatMannwasanindependentcontractor.AstheSupremeCourthasnotedinStrattonv.UnitedInterMountainTelephoneCo.,695 700 S.W.2d947(Tenn.1985),whenthefactsareessentiallyundisputed,thequestionof 922 whetheroneisanemployeeoranindependentcontractorforthepurposesofWorkersCompensation,isoneoflawforthecourt.TheStrattonCourtteachesthatcertain   factorsaretobeconsideredindeterminingwhethertherelationshipisoneofemployeremployeeorindependentcontractor,andthatnoonefactornecessarilycontrols.Theseare:0 4 0 4(#4(#1.Righttocontroltheconductofthework.  (# (#  4  2.Rightoftermination. 4  3.Methodofpayment. 4  4.Whetherallegedemployeefurnisheshisownhelpers. 4  5.Whetherallegedemployeefurnisheshisowntools. 4  6.Whetheroneisdoingworkforanother.Id.at950. `X  4  TheCourtcontinuesthattherighttocontroltheworkisrepeatedlyemphasizedandobserved: Thetestisnotwhethertherighttocontrolisexercised,butmerelywhethertherighttocontrolexisted,Id. x#p  4  Clearly,therighttocontrolexistedinthiscase.Thedefendantcontractedwiththirdpartiesforheatingandairconditioningworkinstallations,andhethencontractedwithManntodotheinstallation.Mannusedthetools,equipment,uniformsandthepremisesofdefendanttocarryoutthework.TheworkingarrangementbetweenMannanddefendantwasessentiallyanallocationofoverheadexpenseswithpaymettoMannforworkperformedbyMannandhisemployees.ThisOnthisrecord,.Mannonlycontributesdlabortotheoperation. 4  Thecourtshavenotedthatthestatutoryschemeunderconsiderationintendedtoensurethatallworkersarepaidbenefitswhentheyareinjuredinthecourseoftheiremployment.Stratton.󀀜AndtThestatutoryintenthasbeenwassatisfiedbythe 700 paymentofWorkersCompensationbenefitstotheplaintiffherein.Weholdonthe 922 undisputedevidencethatdefendantwaswithinthestatutesumbrellaofprotectionasanemployerandwasentitledtojudgment. 4  WeaffirmthejudgmentoftheTrialCourtandremandwiththecostoftheappealassessedtoplaintiff.@+ D  <4   4    <     __________________________ @8  4    <     HerschelP.Franks,J.CONCUR:___________________________DonT.McMurray,J.___________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.