Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Sam Monday Motors

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided August 3, 1981PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BROCK, Justice.

This is a worker’s compensation case. At the conclusion of the trial the court granted judgment to the defendant, finding that the employee’s injuries did not arise out of and in the course of his employment.

There is no material dispute in the evidence. The defendant employer is engaged in the business of selling automobiles and employed the plaintiff, Anderson, as one of its salesmen. As an integral part of the contract of employment, the employer provided to its salesmen, including the plaintiff, demonstrator automobiles for their personal use in going to and from…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McClain v. Kingsport Improvement Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Free v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of North AmericaTennessee Supreme Court · 1941
  3. W. C. Sharp Drug Stores v. HansardTennessee Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Lumbermen's Mut. Cas. Co. v. DedmonTennessee Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Boyd v. Francis Ford, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1973

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pool v. Metric Constructors, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Hastings v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Hastings v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County1990
  4. Smith, LaShonda v. Macy's Corporate ServicesTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API