Cash v. Casey-Hedges Co.
Tennessee Supreme Court
PROM LOUDON. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Loudon County to the Court of Civil Appeals, and by certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals from the Sepreme Court.— Sam C. Brown, Judge.
1DissentWilliams, J.
My dissent is based upon the application of a doctrine, sound in many instances where injury is occasioned by the nearby operation of an independent contractor’s equipment, to this case, where it appears that McCrary company had nothing to do with the selection, employment, or bringing to the premises of the Casey-Hedges Company. We have here two independent subcontractors under the town of Lenoir City. We have, then, the legal equivalent of the *196McCrary Company being at work in. the vicinity of a third party.
Labatt on Master and Servant, section 1069, states the true rule, which in my…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- McGuire v. . Bell Telephone Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1901
- Clark v. Union Iron & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Channon v. Sanford Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- Hughes v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Wilson v. Valley Improvement Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.