CompFox AI Summary
Jone Lee Rogers, a Kroger employee, sought workers' compensation for a knee injury. The central dispute was whether the injury resulted from willful misconduct, specifically horseplay, which would bar recovery under Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-110(a). Rogers claimed an accidental bump on a slick floor, while a co-employee, Henry Knight, testified Rogers intentionally initiated a second collision after an initial accidental one. Conflicting accounts from Rogers, another co-employee, and managers further complicated the testimony. The Chancellor, weighing witness credibility, found Rogers engaged in willful misconduct by intentionally ramming her co-employee, violating Kroger's safety rules, and this was the proximate cause of her injury. The appellate court affirmed the Chancellor's judgment, finding no preponderance of evidence against the lower court's factual findings and credibility determinations.
Rogers v. Kroger Co. 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
Jone Lee Rogers, a Kroger employee, sought workers' compensation for a knee injury. The central dispute was whether the injury resulted from willful misconduct, specifically horseplay, which would bar recovery under Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-110(a). Rogers claimed an accidental bump on a slick floor, while a co-employee, Henry Knight, testified Rogers intentionally initiated a second collision after an initial accidental one. Conflicting accounts from Rogers, another co-employee, and managers further complicated the testimony. The Chancellor, weighing witness credibility, found Rogers engaged in willful misconduct by intentionally ramming her co-employee, violating Kroger's safety rules, and this was the proximate cause of her injury. The appellate court affirmed the Chancellor's judgment, finding no preponderance of evidence against the lower court's factual findings and credibility determinations.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.