Home/Case Law/Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp.
Regular Panel Decision DecisionRegular Panel Decision

Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp.

Court of Appeals of Tennessee
MISSING

CompFox AI Summary

This case involves an interlocutory appeal by defendants Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. and Alfred Ingram, challenging the trial judge's denial of their motion for summary judgment in a wrongful death suit. The plaintiffs sued for the death of Donald Ray Carpenter, an employee of Maury Steel, Inc., who was killed on Hooker's industrial premises under the supervision of Ingram. Defendants argued that the exclusive remedy was under the Workmen's Compensation Law, contending that Carpenter was either an employee of a subcontractor or a 'loaned employee' to Hooker. The Court of Appeals sustained the defendants' arguments, concluding that Hooker was subject to Workmen's Compensation liability as a general contractor and that Carpenter was a 'loaned servant.' Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's decision, granted summary judgment for the defendants, and dismissed the common law action, affirming that the Workmen's Compensation Law provided the sole remedy.

Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. is a workers' compensation case decided in Court of Appeals of Tennessee. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.

It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Court of Appeals of Tennessee.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

This case involves an interlocutory appeal by defendants Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. and Alfred Ingram, challenging the trial judge's denial of their motion for summary judgment in a wrongful death suit. The plaintiffs sued for the death of Donald Ray Carpenter, an employee of Maury Steel, Inc., who was killed on Hooker's industrial premises under the supervision of Ingram. Defendants argued that the exclusive remedy was under the Workmen's Compensation Law, contending that Carpenter was either an employee of a subcontractor or a 'loaned employee' to Hooker. The Court of Appeals sustained the defendants' arguments, concluding that Hooker was subject to Workmen's Compensation liability as a general contractor and that Carpenter was a 'loaned servant.' Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's decision, granted summary judgment for the defendants, and dismissed the common law action, affirming that the Workmen's Compensation Law provided the sole remedy.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. workers compensation case in Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. case law summary from Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. Case Analysis

Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp. is a legal case related to workers' compensation in Court of Appeals of Tennessee. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.