Feathers v. Duncan

OPINION

COOPER, Justice.

This is a workmen’s compensation action in which the only issue is whether the injured worker was an employee or a casual worker within the definition of those *386terms in the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The chancellor found that appellant was a casual worker and dismissed the action. We affirm.

Appellee, doing business as the Jordan Carpet Service, was engaged in carpet sales, installation and service. The State of Tennessee condemned the property on which appellee’s business was located, forcing ap-pellee to relocate. Appellee purchased a brick building and undertook to…