Legal Opinion

True v. Amerail Corp.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided August 6, 1979PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HENRY, Judge.

The sole question in this Workmen’s Compensation action is whether a Tennessee resident, employed principally in Tennessee under a contract made in Tennessee, who is injured while working in Virginia, and who accepts benefits under the Virginia Workmen’s Compensation law, is barred from a recovery under Tennessee Law. The Chancellor sustained the employer’s motion for a summary judgment. We affirm.

I

Plaintiff is a resident of Washington County, Tennessee, where Amerail maintains offices and where the contract of employment was made. He was employed principally in Tennessee;…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Industrial Comm'n of Wis. v. McCartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Thomas v. Transport Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Tidwell v. Chattanooga Boiler & Tank Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Perkins v. BE & K, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Gray v. Holloway Construction Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Bradshaw v. Old Republic Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Roadway Express, Inc. v. WarrenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
  5. Hale v. Commercial Union Assurance CompaniesTennessee Supreme Court · 1982

3 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