Legal Opinion

Revels v. Hoechst Celanese Corp.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided April 2, 1990No. 1479PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Goolsby, Judge:

The dispositive issue in this personal injury action brought by Richard Revels, an employee of Kenan Transport Company, against Hoechst Celanese Corporation is whether Revels was Celanese’s “statutory employee” when he was injured at Celanese’s distribution terminal while assisting in the loading of chemicals into Kenan’s tanker. The trial court granted Celanese’s motion for summary judgment, finding Revels was Celanese’s “statutory employee.” We affirm.

According to Leslie J. Cribb, manager of Celanese’s terminal operations, Celanese distributes liquid organic chemicals to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Adams v. Davison-Paxon Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1957
  2. Hopkins v. Darlington Veneer Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1946
  3. Wilson v. Daniel International Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1973
  4. Hairston v. Re: Leasing, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
  5. Raines v. Gould, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1986

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Carrier v. Westvaco Corp.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1992
  2. Edens v. BelliniCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2004
  3. Riden v. Kemet Electronics Corp.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993
  4. Posey v. Proper Mold & Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008
  5. Woodard v. Westvaco Corp.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993

2 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