Legal Opinion

Neese v. Michelin Tire Corp.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided October 14, 1996No. 2578PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOWELL, Chief Judge:

Samuel Terran Neese (Neese) appeals from the circuit court’s order concluding that Neese’s action against Michelin Tire Corporation (Michelin) was barred by the exclusivity provision of the South Carolina Workers’ Compensation Act. We affirm.

I

In 1991, Neese was employed as a truck driver by Vanguard Services, Inc. (Vanguard), an interstate trucking company. Prior to December 1991, Vanguard and Michelin entered into a contract whereby Vanguard agreed to transport certain semi-finished products and packaging materials to and from Michelin’s various facilities. Paragraph ten…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Marchbanks v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1939
  2. Ballenger v. BowenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
  3. Bridges v. Wyandotte Worsted Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1963
  4. McDowell v. Stilley Plywood Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1947
  5. Adams v. Davison-Paxon Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1957

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Edens v. BelliniCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2004
  2. Abbott v. the Limited, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
  3. Olmstead v. ShakespeareSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  4. Voss v. Ramco, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1997
  5. Posey v. Proper Mold & Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API