CompFox AI Summary
Clarence Howard, an inmate at Marion County jail, sought workers' compensation after injuring his back while performing work at the county landfill. The Chancellor ruled that Howard, as a convict, could not form a contract of employment with Marion County and thus was not an employee under workers' compensation laws. This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court, which cited established legal precedents that inmates performing work during their imprisonment are generally not considered employees for workers' compensation purposes, as they cannot enter into a true contract of hire involving remuneration. The Court found no evidence of an agreement for Howard to be compensated by Marion County for his services.
Howard v. Uselton is a workers' compensation case decided in Tennessee Supreme Court. 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 Tennessee Supreme Court.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Clarence Howard, an inmate at Marion County jail, sought workers' compensation after injuring his back while performing work at the county landfill. The Chancellor ruled that Howard, as a convict, could not form a contract of employment with Marion County and thus was not an employee under workers' compensation laws. This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court, which cited established legal precedents that inmates performing work during their imprisonment are generally not considered employees for workers' compensation purposes, as they cannot enter into a true contract of hire involving remuneration. The Court found no evidence of an agreement for Howard to be compensated by Marion County for his services.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.