ÿWPCâ …# VUNa %¯ 0åµw@š 4Ú î ý { 0L 0JU 0TŸ 0^ó 0hQ 0r¹ 0|+ 0†§ 0- 1u½ 0d2U>–B)ÔDCý AM@U*W· Bv~+vÓ© 0N| D3Ê 0@ý AO=ÆŒ 0DR D/– BŘHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(½0ï$¡¡Ñ°ÑѰÑÒ°°ÒÒ°°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓÔ€XNXXXÔ K{LNUOUPVQURVSVTÓ€`s|˜!3|x`(ÜË$¡¡Ò°°ÒÒ°°ÒÑñÑÑñÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓÔ€XNXXXÔÔ€0·ø 0XXNÔ> ÿÿ$Small Circleððà0 à2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial MÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÔ€#ÔÔ€#ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€#XÔÌÌò òDecemberÏ31,€1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€#ôÔAppellateÏCourt€Clerkó ó dPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò>‡¦$"Small Circleð"ðà0  à%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  Ýò òÓÓÓ  Ó›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌà@ àò òWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSON€€Ìà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌóóÌÌBRIAN€WOLNEY€and€WIFE,€€€à àà à)à àÌMELISSA€WOLNEYà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àó óPlaintiffs/Appellants,ò òà àà àà à)à àó óShelby€Circuit€No.€56764€€Ìò òà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€ÌœÙ€€ÙßR€"$!A1-j|kÆ` ­ `€€@ÿRß›à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àó óAppeal€No.€02A01„9508„CV„00169ò òÌLISA€M.€EMMONS€and€WELLS€€€€€€à à)ÌFARGO€ARMORED€SERVICE€€€€€à à)ÌCORPORATION,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìó óà àDefendants/€Appellees.à àò òà à)à àÌòòó óÌò òóóÌ€€€ÌÌÌà@ àó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€SHELBY€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€MEMPHIS€TENNESSEEÌÌÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€GEORGE€H.€BROWN,€JR.,€JUDGEÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiffs/Appellantsóó:òòà àà àà àFor€the€Defendants/Appelleesóó:òòÌóóÌStanley€J.€Kline€à àà àà àà àMarc€O.€Dedman€€€€€€€€€€€ÌMemphis,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TennesseeÌÌò òÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAFFIRMED€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòÌóóALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ÇØØÙ  ÙÓÓÑ7€XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  ќ̛à@ àò òOPINIONó ớ̜à àThis€is€a€suit€for€damages€brought€by€Plaintiff€Brian€Wolney€(ð ðWolneyðð),€with€his€wifeÏMelissa€Wolney,€against€Defendants€Wells€Fargo€Armored€Service€Corporation€(ð ðWFAðð)€and€LisaÏM.€Emmons€(ð ðEmmonsðð).€€Wolney€œsued›€for€personal€injuries€he€sustained€in€an€accident€whileÏriding€as€a€passenger€in€a€vehicle€driven€by€Emmons,€but€owned€by€WFA.€€The€trial€court€grantedÏpartial€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€WFA,€finding€that€Wolneyððs€tort€claim€against€WFA€wasÏbarred€because€Wolney€was€WFAððs€statutory€employee.€€The€Wolneys€appeal€the€grant€of€partialÏsummary€judgment.€€We€affirm.€Ìà àThe€facts€are€essentially€undisputed.€€Wolney€worked€as€a€guard€for€Wells€Fargo€GuardÏService€(ð ðWFGðð).€€WFG€had€entered€into€a€written€Security€Services€Agreement€(ð ðAgreementðð)Ïwith€WFA,€under€which€WFG€would€occasionally€furnish€guards€to€WFA.€€The€AgreementÏprovided,€in€pertinent€part:€ÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÓÓ3.€€ò òEMPLOYEES:€ó óà à(a)€Personnel€supplied€by€Company€[WFG]€€are€itsÏemployees€and€not€Clientððs€[WFA].€€Company€is€solely€responsible€for€socialÏsecurity,€unemployment€and€similar€taxes€applicable€to€its€employees€.€.€.ÌÌà àà àà àœ(c)›€Client€may€reasonably€remove€any€employee€assignedÏprovided€such€removal€is€not€in€violation€of€law€.€.€.€ÌÌ4.€€ò òHIRING:€ó óClient€agrees€that€it€will€not,€directly€or€indirectly,€hire€or€employÏany€Company€employee€assigned€to€Client€while€such€employee€is€employed€byÏCompany€or€for€one€year€thereafter.€.€.ÌÌ9.€€ò òSCOPE€OF€SERVICES:€ó óThis€Agreement€and€written€schedule€of€guardÏassignments,€patrol€inspections€and€post€orders,€which€collectively€set€forth€theÏSecurity€Services€to€be€performed,€may€be€changed€with€the€written€approval€ofÏCompany.€€Other€amendments€to€this€Agreement€must€be€in€writing€and€signed€byÏthe€authorized€representatives€of€the€parties€thereto.€€If€there€is€any€conflict€betweenÏthe€terms€of€any€other€documents€and€this€Agreement,€this€Agreement€shall€control.€€ÌÓÓÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° Òà àGenerally,€under€the€Agreement,€either€Chris€Fowler€(ð ðFowlerðð),€a€vault€supervisor€atÏWFA,€or€his€supervisor,€would€call€WFG€and€request€guard€services.€€Charlie€PegrumÏ(ð ðPegrumðð),€the€operations€manager€at€WFG,€would€then€find€an€available€guard,€notify€him€of€theÏassignment,€and€œconvey€any€information€about€the€assignment€given€by€WFA.€€The›€guard€couldÏturn€down€the€assignment,€but€œonce€it›€was€accepted,€€he€€had€to€complete€it.€€When€the€guardÍarrived€to€work,€WFA€would€give€the€guard€orders€as€to€what€tasks€to€perform€and€how€toÏperform€œthem.ÌÇÌà àIn›€this€instance,€a€WFA€employee€called€Pegrum€and€requested€an€unarmed€guard€for€dutyÏfor€two€days,€providing€Pegrum€with€general€information€about€the€assignment.€€Pegrum€thenÏnotified€Wolney€of€the€assignment€at€WFA€and€gave€him€an€overview€of€the€€type€of€workÏrequired.€€Pegrum€told€Wolney€that€he€would€be€riding€in€the€passenger€side€of€a€truck€and€wouldÏstay€inside€and€push€buttons€to€let€people€in€and€out€of€the€truck.€€Pegrum€told€Wolney€when€WFAÏwanted€him€to€report€to€work.€€Wolney€accepted€the€assignment.€€His€first€day€working€for€WFAÏwas€uneventful.Ìà àWhen€Wolney€reported€to€work€at€WFA€the€second€day,€he€was€told€by€a€WFA€employeeÏto€ride€in€a€WFA€ð ðbank€truckðð€as€an€unarmed€guard€escort,€along€with€two€of€WFAððs€own€guards.€ÏWolney€sat€in€the€front€passenger€seat€of€the€truck,€œdriven›€by€defendant€Emmons.€€Charles€JonesÏ(ð ðJonesðð),€the€messenger€guard€who€was€effectively€in€charge€of€the€truck,€sat€in€the€back€seat.€€œItÏwas€the€messenger€guardððs€responsibility€to€tell›€Wolney€where€to€sit€in€the€truck€and€what€to€do.€ÏWolneyððs€œduties›€were€to€assist€the€messenger€guard€and€œto€stay›€with€the€truck€while€the€otherÏguards€carried€the€money€in€and€out€of€the€banks.€€Later€that€day,€the€WFA€vehicle€in€whichÏWolney€was€riding€became€involved€in€a€serious€motor€vehicle€œcollision,›€and€Wolney€was€injured.Ìà àSubsequently,€€Wolney€filed€this€suit€to€recover€damages€for€the€injuries€he€sustained€as€aÏresult€of€the€accident.€€Both€Wolney€and€WFA€moved€for€partial€summary€judgment€on€the€issueÏof€whether€Wolney€was€an€employee€of€WFA.€€The€trial€court€found€that,€as€a€matter€of€law,ÏWolney€was€a€statutory€employee€under€the€Workersðð€Compensation€œAct,ò ò€ó óTennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€ðð€50„6„102(a)(9)€(1991€&€Supp.€1996),›€and€that€his€tort€action€against€WFA€wasÏtherefore€barred.€€Consequently,€the€trial€court€granted€partial€summary€judgment€in€favor€ofÏWFA.€€The€Wolneys€appeal€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€on€this€issue.Ìà àSummary€judgment€is€proper€when€the€movant€demonstrates€that€there€are€no€genuineÏissues€of€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€party€is€entitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Tenn.ÏR.€Civ.€P.€56.03.€€The€party€moving€for€summary€judgment€bears€the€burden€of€demonstratingÍthat€no€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€exists.€€ò òòòByrd€v.€Hallóóó ó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€210€(Tenn.€1993).€ÏOn€a€motion€for€summary€judgment,€œthe€court›€must€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€theÏevidence€in€favor€œÇof›€the€nonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€that€party,€and€discard€allÏcountervailing€evidence.€€òòò òId.€ó óóóat€210„11.€€In€ò òòòByrdó óóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àOnce€it€is€shown€by€the€moving€party€that€there€is€no€genuine€issue€of€material€fact,Ïthe€nonmoving€party€must€then€demonstrate,€by€affidavits€or€discovery€materials,Ïthat€there€is€a€genuine,€material€fact€dispute€to€warrant€a€trial.€€In€this€regard,€RuleÏ56.05€provides€that€the€nonmoving€party€cannot€simply€rely€upon€his€pleadings€butÏmust€set€forth€òòò òspecific€factsó óóó€showing€that€there€is€a€genuine€issue€of€material€factÏfor€trial.€€ð ðIf€he€does€not€so€respond,€summary€judgment€.€.€.€shall€be€enteredÏagainst€him.ððÌÌÓÓò òòòId.€ó óóóat€211òòò ò€ó óóó(citations€omitted).€€Summary€judgment€is€only€appropriate€when€the€case€can€beÏdecided€on€the€legal€issues€alone.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€at€210.€€Because€only€questions€of€law€are€involved,€there€isÏno€presumption€of€correctness€regarding€a€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment.€€ò òòòJohnson€v.ÏEMPE,€Inc.ó óóó,€837€S.W.2d€62,€68€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Therefore,€our€review€of€a€trial€courtððsÏorder€granting€summary€judgment€is€ò òòòde€novoó óóó€on€the€record€before€this€Court.€€ò òòòSee€Carvell€v.ÏBottomsó óóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,€26€(Tenn.€1995).ò òÌà àó óIn€this€appeal,€Wolney€argues€that€he€was€not€an€employee€of€œWFA,›€œand›€consequently,€hisÏtort€claim€against€WFA€is€not€barred€by€the€œWorkersðð›€Compensation€Act.€€Wolney€contends€that€heÏwas€an€independent€contractor€rather€than€an€employee.Ìà àUnder€the€œWorkersðð›€Compensation€Act,€œworkersðð›€compensation€benefits€are€an€employeeððsÏexclusive€remedy€for€personal€injuries€suffered€by€accident€in€the€workplace.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ50„6„108(a)(1991€&€Supp.€1996).€€Thus,€if€Wolney€is€deemed€an€œan›€œð ðemployeeðð›€of€WFA,€hisÏcommon€law€action€against€WFA€would€be€dismissed€because€œworkersðð›€compensation€benefitsÏwould€be€his€exclusive€remedy.€€ò òòòSee€Stratton€v.€United€Inter„Mountain€œTel.›€Co.ó óóó,€695ÏS.W.2d€947,€948€(Tenn.€1985).€€However,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„112€permits€anÏemployee€to€€bring€a€common€law€action€for€damages€against€a€third€party,€not€his€employer.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„112€(1991€&€Supp.€1996).€€Therefore,€if€Wolney€was€working€as€anÏindependent€contractor€for€WFA,€rather€than€an€employee,€his€tort€action€against€WFA€would€notÏbe€barred€by€the€œWorkersðð›€Compensation€Act.€€ò òòòSee€Barber€v.€Ralston€Purinaóóó ó,€825€S.W.2dÏ96,€99€(Tenn.€App.€1991).€Ìà àThe€œWorkersðð›€Compensation€Act€is€a€remedial€statute,€to€be€interpreted€in€favor€of€personsÏentitled€to€its€benefits.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ50„6„116›€(1991€&€Supp.€1996)€(providing€that€theÏstrict€construction€of€statutes€in€derogation€of€common€law€does€not€apply€to€the€Act);€ò òòòCurtis€v.ÏHamilton€Block€Co.ó óóó,€226€œTenn.›€275,€466€S.W.2d€220€(1971).€€Consequently,€the€Act€is€givenÏa€construction€œ€Çthat›€favors€a€finding€that€a€worker€is€an€employee€rather€than€an€independent€contractor.€€ò òòòCurtisó óóó,Ï466€S.W.2d€at€222;€ò òòòBarker€v.€Curtisó óóó,€287€S.W.2d€43,€46€(Tenn.€1956).Ìà àTo€determine€whether€a€worker€is€an€employee€or€an€independent€contractor€under€theÏWorkersðð€Compensation€Act,€the€following€factors€are€considered:Ò  ÒÒ  ÒÓÓ(A)€€The€right€toÏcontrol€the€conduct€of€the€work;€Ì(B)€€The€right€of€termination;€Ìœ(C)€›€The€method€of€payment;€Ì(D)€€The€freedom€to€select€and€hire€helpers;€Ì(E)€€The€furnishings€of€tools€and€equipment;€Ì(F)€€Self€scheduling€of€working€hours;€andÌ(G)€€The€freedom€to€offer€services€to€other€entities;€€ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102(a)(9)€(1991€&€Supp.€1996).€€The€right€to€control,€though€notÏdispositive,€is€emphasized€in€the€analysis.€€òòò òCarver€v.€Sparta€Elec.€Systemó óóó,€690€S.W.2d€218,Ï220€(Tenn.€1985).€€Ìà àœHowever,€the›€right€to€control€must€œexist›€in€relation€to€the€conduct€and€manner€of€the€œworkÏperformed,›€and€not€just€the€end€product:ÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÓÓà àThe€primary€test€for€determining€claimantððs€status€as€employee€orÏindependent€contractor€is€the€ð ðright€to€control.ðð€€Generally,€when€the€generalÏcontractor€has€a€right€to€supervise€or€inspect€the€work€to€see€that€the€end€resultÏconforms€to€plans€and€specifications€but€has€no€right€of€control€over€details€ofÏperformance€and€methods€used€to€achieve€this€result,€the€general€or€principalÏcontractor€and€the€worker€do€not€have€an€employer„employee€relationship.€€ThatÏworker€is€an€independent€contractor.€ÌÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓò òòòLindsey€v.€Smith€œ&›€Johnson,€Inc.ó óóó,€601€S.W.2d€923,925€(Tenn.€1980)€(citations€omitted).ÏLabels€placed€upon€workers€in€contracts€are€not€binding:ÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÓÓà àThe€provision€in€the€contract€that€purports€to€establish€that€Wright€andÏLopez€is€an€independent€contractor€is€likewise€not€dispositive€of€the€case.€€WhenÏthe€facts€are€essentially€undisputed,€as€in€this€case,€the€question€of€whether€one€isÏan€employee€or€an€independent€contractor€is€one€of€law€for€the€courts.€€The€partiesÏcannot€by€contract€take€this€responsibility€from€the€court.ÌÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓò òòòStrattonó óóó,€695€S.W.2d€at€953€(citations€omitted).€Ìà àIn€this€case,€the€facts€indicate€that€WFA€had€the€right€to€control€the€conduct€of€WolneyððsÏwork,€under€œTennessee›€Code€œAnnotated›€ðð€50„6„102(a)(9).€€Wolney€notes€that€the€Agreement€gaveÏhim€the€right€to€turn€down€the€assignment€to€œWFA.›€€However,€once€Wolney€accepted€theÍassignment,€he€was€bound€to€complete€it.€€Wolneyððs€work€instructions€were€prepared€by€œWFA,Ïthough›€œthey›€were€initially€conveyed€œto€him€by›€œa›€WFG€employee.€€Although€the€contract€ostensiblyÏrequired€written€approval€of€changes€in€the€work€assignment,€the€instructions€received€by€WFGÏwere€subject€to€change€in€WFAððs€discretion.€€Normally,€Fowler€or€another€WFA€employee€wouldÏtell€the€WFG€guards€which€run€they€were€on€and€give€them€the€details€of€their€assignment€whenÏthey€reported€to€work.€€In€this€case,€a€WFA€employee€prepared€Wolneyððs€work€schedule€andÏassigned€him€to€a€specific€WFA€vehicle.€€Ìà àœWolney€testified€that€Jones,›€a€messenger€guard€and€a€WFA€employee,€told€œhim›€where€to€sitÏin€the€armored€vehicle€and€how€and€when€to€push€the€buttons.€€œWolney€also€testified€that€Jones›€Ïtold€œhim€to›€wait€inside€the€vehicle€œwhile€Jones€and›€Emmons€performed€their€duties.€€œJones,€on€theÏother€hand,€testified€that€he€did€not€give€Wolney€any€instructions€on€the€day€of€the€accident.€ÏNevertheless,€it€is€undisputed€that€it€was€the€messenger€guardððs€responsibility€to€instruct€WolneyÏas€to€his€duties.€€Any€dispute€of€fact€as€to€whether€Jones›€œactually€gave›€Wolney€instructions€on€theÏday€of€the€accident€is€œimmaterial›€because€the€test€is€whether€the€right€to€control€òòò òexistedó óóó,€notÏwhether€or€not€it€was€exercised.€€òòò òSee€Carveró óóó,€€690€S.W.2d€at€œ220.€€Thus,›€the€facts€indicate€thatÏWFA€had€the€right€to€control€the€conduct€of€Wolneyððs€work.€€€€Ìà àOther€factors€listed€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€56„6„108€œmilitate›€in€favor€of€a€findingÏthat€Wolney€was€an€employee€of€WFA.€€€Although€WFA€did€not€furnish€tools€to€Wolney,€itÏfurnished€the€armored€truck€in€which€he€was€riding€at€the€time€of€the€accident.€€In€addition,ÏWolney€was€not€free€to€hire€others€to€help€him€with€his€duties.€€Moreover,€WFA€had€completeÏcontrol€over€Wolneyððs€work€schedule€at€WFA,€including€the€time€that€he€was€to€report€to€work,Ïthe€time€that€he€would€leave€work,€and€the€number€of€hours€that€he€worked.€€€€€Ìà àWFA€also€had€œthe›€right€to€terminate€Wolney€at€any€time.€€The€right€of€termination€ð ðisÏincompatible€with€the€full€control€of€the€work€which€is€usually€exercised€by€an€independentÏcontractor.ðð€€ò òòòFrost€v.€Blue€Ridge€Timber€Corp.ó ó,óóò ò€ó ó158€Tenn.€18,€22,€11€S.W.2d€860,€862Ï(1928);€ò òòòsee€also€Masiers€v.€Arrow€Transfer€&€Storage€Co.ó óóó,€639€S.W.2d€654,€656Í(Tenn.€1982);òòò ò€œCurtis,€ó óóó466›€S.W.2d€œat›€œ222.€€The›€right€of€termination€is€not€controlling€when€thereÏare€no€other€factors€to€indicate€an€employer„employee€relationship.€€ò òòòWright€v.€Knox€Vinyl€&ÏAlum.€Co.ó óóó,€779€S.W.2d€371,€374€(Tenn.€1989).€€However,€in€this€case,€numerous€factorsÏindicate€that€Wolney€was€a€statutory€employee€of€WFA.€€Ìà àWolney€argues€that€the€Agreement€between€WFG€and€WFA€designates€Wolney€as€anÏemployee€of€WFG,€not€WFA.€€However,€this€language€€is€not€dispositive.€€òòò òStrattonó óóó,€€695ÏS.W.2d€at€953.€€€€Wolney€notes€further€that€he€was€wearing€his€WFG€uniform€on€the€day€of€theÏaccident,€and€€that€WFG€paid€his€salary€and€made€tax€and€social€security€deductions.€€These€factorsÏare€considered€but€are€not€controlling.€€ò òòòGalloway€v.€Memphis€Drum€Serv.ó óóó,€822€S.W.2dÏ584,€587€(Tenn.€1991);€ò òòòsee€also€Wooten€Transports,€œInc.€v.€Hunteró óóó,›€535€S.W.2d€œ858,Ï860€(Tenn.€1976)€(finding›€that€a€companyððs€failure€to€withhold€deductions€for€social€security,Ïincome€taxes,€and€workersðð€compensation€was€not€controlling).€€Ìà àTherefore,€analyzing€the€facts€in€light€of€the€factors€set€forth€in€Tennessee€Annotated€CodeÏðð€50„6„102(a)(9),€WFA€had€the€right€to€control€the€conduct€of€Wolneyððs€work€and€the€right€toÏterminate€him.€€Wolney€was€not€free€to€hire€helpers.€€WFA€furnished€the€equipment€to€Wolney,€theÏvehicle,€and€scheduled€œhis›€working€hours.€€These€factors€clearly€weigh€in€favor€of€finding€thatÏWolney€was€a€statutory€employee€of€WFA.€€Weighed€against€these€are€the€fact€that€Wolney€wasÏpaid€by€WFG,€that€Wolney€could€have€turned€down€the€assignment,€and€that€the€agreementÏdesignates€workers€such€as€Wolney€as€employees€of€WFG.Ìà àAs€noted€above,€the€œWorkersðð›€Compensation€Act€is€remedial€in€œnature€›€and€is€to€beÏconstrued€in€favor€of€a€finding€that€a€worker€is€a€statutory€employee.€€€òòò òCurtisó óóó,€466€S.W.2d€atÏ222;€€òòò òBarkeró óóó,€199€Tenn.€at€413,€287€S.W.2d€at€46;€ò òòòsee€alsoóóó ó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„116.€€InÏlight€of€this€construction,€the€undisputed€facts€in€this€case€indicate€that€Wolney€qualifies€as€aÏstatutory€employee€of€œWFA€›€and€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€granting€partial€summaryÏjudgment€in€favor€of€WFA.€€Ìà àAccordingly,€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€toÍAppellant,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àò òóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ó ó