Harrell v. Pineland Plantation, Ltd.

CURETON,

Judge, concurs:

I concur in Judge Connor’s view that Pineland was not a covered employer at the time of Harrell’s injury because it had not secured worker’s compensation coverage. Additionally, I would reverse the trial court’s decision because I am of the opinion that at the time of Harrell’s accident, he was not performing work which was a part of the trade, business or occupation of Pineland.

Initially, I observe that I agree with Judge Goolsby’s conclusion that we must accept Pineland was in business even though it realized no income. Unquestionably, Pineland had designed a plan to…