WPC1 #  UN %= 0 C U:>4x w: 0? 0D" 0fe } 0 0J 0T 0^< 0h 0rt: 0| 0 0 B 1u; 0d D3 0@G 0KU>U *U*:pdpB)D!DCm! D+! AO!*"#%U6>'v~t'v( AO./ 0D/ D/0 BM0 AYj0 0F0 A 1HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(H=$  HTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalTX_XXX7XXdXXd7,  AZ"Arial RegularZ;$3|xn$H M$N$P$EQ$ UR$US$ET$PU$Pc$Ӏ((3$ H=!  HTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TXXXXX7 XXdd7   `   0  (#$  0  (3$ H=!  HTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalTXXXXX7 XXdXXd7   (3$ H=!  HTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalTXXXXX7 XXdXXd7  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  ԁLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   d!"# ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X$$$$'dxd("$    ( $ Figure  1  <  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial<  9p`(Times f !  #d#3    H \RA'\4#d#  )  .$FRAZIER.WC$FRAZIER.WC/   f !  #d#3    H \RA'\4#d#  )  .$FRAZIER.WC$FRAZIER.WC/  % Line 7 d88887Border 1dd'dxd-.9C << G  !  #d#3    H \RA'\4#d#    4 YYY FILED4X 4February13,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk   !#d#3    H \RA'\4#d#   $       ݀ItappearstheactualdefendantrelevanttothiscaseisLandairTransport,Inc.  !#d#3    H \RA'\4#d#  4   YYY FILED4X February13,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.4AppellateCourtClerk <  9p`(Courier NewPtPtHH(EG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd -:M << deUU(n$ (  1  ) -.:&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK ! . 3    H \RA'\4#55Xd##55Xd#        X @ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ SPECIALWORKERS'COMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL@ ATKNOXVILLE   6֜       7֜       WILLIAMALLENFRAZIER,  )      )  Plaintiff/Appellant   ) SULLIVANLAWCOURT        ) v.      ) NO.03S019706CV00064      ) LANDAIRSERVICES,INC.,  ) HON.JOHNMcCLELLAN,III,d/b/aLANDAIRTRANSPORT,INC., ) JUDGEٜR;<9A1-j|<C81 `@Rߛ      ) Defendant/Appellee  ) FortheAppellant:    FortheAppellee: HowardR.Dunbar    StevenH.Trent,Esq.Dunbar&Dunbar    Baker,Donelson,Bearman&CaldwellP.O.Box1215    207MockingbirdLaneJohnsonCity,TN37605   P.O.Box3038        JohnsonCity,TN37602    MEMORANDUMOPINION MembersofPanel: ChiefJusticeE.RileyAndersonSeniorJudgeJohnK.ByersSpecialJudgeRogerE.Thayer  %  AFFIRMED       BYERS,SeniorJudge   OPINION    Thisworkers'compensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw. TheplaintiffallegedinhispetitionthathewasinjuredwhileunloadingaϜtrailerwhileintheemploymentofthedefendant. =   ׀ThedefendantfiledaMotionforSummaryJudgmentsupportedbyaffidavits,andtheplaintiffansweredthemotionbyfilingaffidavitsalso.Thetrialjudgegrantedsummaryjudgmenttothedefendantanddismissedtheplaintiffspetition. Weaffirmthejudgment. Theissueraisedinthiscaseiswhethertheplaintiffwasanemployeeofthedefendantandthusentitledtorecoverworkerscompensationbenefitsforhisinjury.ThestructureoftherelationshipbetweentheplaintiffandthedefendantwasderivedfromtheemploymentoftheplaintiffasadriverwithacompanyknownasCentralTrucking,Inc. LandairTransport,Inc.enteredintoacontractwithCentralTruckingwherebyCentralTruckingwouldtowthedefendantstrailersonshipmentstothedefendantscustomers.ThecontractprovidedthattheemployeesofCentralTruckingwouldnotbeemployeesofthedefendant. Theplaintiffcontendedinhispetitionandaffidavitthathewasinjuredwhileunloadingatrailerforthedefendantandthatallunloadingfeeswerenegotiatedbetweenhimandaterminalmanagerofthedefendant.Theplaintiffclaimsthiscreatedanemployeremployeerelationshipbetweenhimandthedefendant.OneoftheownersofCentralTruckingfiledanaffidavitinsupportoftheplaintiffsclaimthattheamounttobepaidforunloadingwasnegotiatedbetweentheplaintiffandthedefendant. Thetrialjudgeconsideredtheaffidavits,thecontractbetweenthedefendantandCentralTrucking,andvariousdocumentsfiledinsupportofandinoppositiontotheMotionforSummaryJudgment.Afterreviewingthedocumentsandhearingargumentsofcounsel,thetrialcourtgrantedthedefendantsMotionforSummaryJudgmentandsaid: `  H Ӝ...theCourtfindsandisoftheopinionthatthereisnogenuineissueastowhetherornotPlaintiffwasemployedbyDefendant....   H  Thetrialcourtfurtherfoundthattheplaintiffcouldnot,pursuanttoTenn.Code.Ann.506106(1)(A),beanemployeeofthedefendant.Asaseparategroundfordismissingtheaction,thetrialcourtfoundtheplaintiffwasanemployeeonlyofCentralTrucking. ThepertinentportionofTenn.Code.Ann.506106(1)(A)asitappliestothiscaseisasfollows: `  H ...thatnocommoncarrierbymotorvehicleoperatingpursuanttoacertificateofpublicconvenienceandnecessityshallbedeemedthe employerofaleasedoperatororowneroperatorofamotorvehicleorvehiclesunderacontracttosuchacommoncarrier.   H TheplaintiffbyreasonofthisstatutecouldnotbeanemployeeofthedefendantbecausehewasadriverforCentralTrucking.Thequestionthenbecomeswhethertheplaintiffwasanemployeeofthedefendantwhenheunloadedthetrailersatthedeliverypoint. TheagreementbetweenthedefendantandCentralTruckingspecificallyprovidedforcompensationtobepaidbythedefendanttoCentralTrucking.Amongtheseprovisions,listedundersecondarycompensationfromthedefendanttoCentralTruckingisthefollowingterm: `  H LOADING/UNLOADING100%ofamountcollectedfromcustomerforloadingifproperlydocumented.   H  Therecordinthiscaseshowsthiswasdone.TheplaintiffandCentralTrucking,byaffidavitoftheowner,contendthatCentralTruckingonlyhandledthepaymenttotheplaintiffforunloadingforconvenienceandthatCentralTruckinghadnothingtodowiththeamountpaid,etc. ItisclearthattheplaintiffsclaimandtheaffidavitfromtheownerofCentralTruckingdonotcreateafactualissuesufficienttoraiseagenuineissueoffactontheemploymentstatusoftheplaintiffvisavisthedefendant.Therefore,thetrialcourtproperlygrantedthedefendantsMotionforSummaryJudgment.̜ Theplaintiffcontendssummaryjudgmentisnotappropriateinworkerscompensationcases.HereliesuponByrdv.Hall,847S.W.2d208(Tenn.1993),whereintheSupremeCourtnotedthatadimviewoftheuseofsummaryjudgmentwastakenbythetrialcourtinworkerscompensationcases.HealsoreliesonBerryv.ConsolidatedSys.,Inc.,804S.W.2d445(Tenn.1991),wheretheCourtsaidsummaryjudgmentwasalmostneveranoptionincontestedworkerscompensationactions. However,theSupremeCourtinthecaseofLongv.StatelineSys.,Inc.,738S.W.2d622(Tenn.1985),approvedtheuseofsummaryjudgmentinacaseinvolvingtheapplicationofTenn.Code.Ann.506106(1)(A)toapersonsituatedasarethepartiesinvolvedinthiscase.Subsequent,unreportedcasesbytheSpecialWorkersCompensationPanelhaveheldsummaryjudgmentisappropriatewhentherecordshowsthereisnogenuinefactualdisputeorissuebetweenthepartiessothatthecourtcandeterminetheissueoflawupontherecordofthecase.Useltonv.ConwoodCo.,No.02S019607CV00070,1997WL76807(Tenn.Feb.25,1997);Bailorv.AmericanBreadCo.,No.01S019406CH00063,1995WL120491(Tenn.Mar.21,1995).̛      _____________________________      JohnK.Byers,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:________________________________E.RileyAnderson,ChiefJustice________________________________RogerE.Thayer,SpecialJudge   H Ҝ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE    ATKNOXVILLE    H         S  H WILLIAMALLENFRAZIER,  )SULLIVANLAWCOURT̀     )No.C10030 Plaintiff/Appellant   )            ) vs.      )Hon.JohnMcClellan,III       )Judge        )LANDAIRSERVICES,INC.,  ) d/b/aLANDAIRTRANSPORT,INC. )NO.03S019706CV0064J;>;+'b|` 81 `@J      )  Defendant/Appellees.  )       )           JUDGMENTORDER    f  ` X XThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltotheSpecialWorkersCompensationPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference;  Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and  Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanelsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadetheJudgmentoftheCourt.    H  CostsonappealaretaxedtoWilliamAllenFrazierandHowardDunbar,surety,whichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.02/13/98̀ <>  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtuponmotionforreviewpursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(5)(B),theentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltotheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference;    Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthatthemotionforreviewisnotwelltakenandshouldbedenied;and  Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanelsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt.  Costswillbepaidbytheplaintiffappellantandsureties,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.  ITISSOORDEREDthis____dayofJune,1997.      PERCURIAMAnderson,J.NotParticipating<>  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtuponmotionforreviewpursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(5)(B),theentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltotheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference;  Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthatthemotionforreviewisnotwelltakenandshouldbedenied;and  Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanelsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt.  Costswillbepaidbytheplaintiffappellantandsureties,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.  ITISSOORDEREDthis____dayofJune,1997.      PERCURIAMAnderson,J.NotParticipatingaltotheSpecialWorkerCompensationPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference;  Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanelsfindingsofactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadetheJudgmentoftheCourt. Costsonappealaretaxedtotheplaintiffappellant,VernonHarrisandGilbertandFaulkner.surety,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.06/03//97       ??ԛ