 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Abbott v. Limited Inc.6/23/1998
Appeal From Florence County James E. Brogdon, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Heard April 9, 1998
AFFIRMED
Ronnie and Peggy Abbott appeal from the circuit court's order finding that the exclusivity provision of the South Carolina Workers' Compensation Act barred their personal injury and loss of consortium action against The Limited, Inc., d/b/a/ Lane Bryant. We affirm.
FACTS
In 1992, Ronnie Abbott was employed as a truck driver by Observer Transport, a common carrier which operates to transport goods for various businesses in and around Florence, South Carolina. In 1988, Observer and Lane Bryant, a retail clothing store, entered into a contract whereby Observer agreed to transport certain packaged material to various Lane Bryant facilities. The contract provides, in relevant part, as follows:
"Section 10. No Partnership. Carrier [Observer] is not an employee, agent, legal representative, joint venturer or partner of LDS [Limited Distribution Services, Inc.] or the Retailers for any purpose, but is an independent contractor. Carrier will have sole and exclusive control over the manner in which its employees or agents perform services under this Agreement. Carrier assumes full responsibility for, and neither LDS nor any Retailer will have liability with respect to, employees or agents employed by Carrier to carry out the performance of services under this agreement."
"Section 11. Timing: Transportation. . . . . Carrier also acknowledges that the prompt and efficient transportation of Goods is essential to the business of the retailers."
On December 21, 1992, Abbott was injured when he tripped over a mop bucket and box in the hallway while moving boxes into a Lane Bryant facility. Abbott filed for and wai4 awarded workers' compensation benefits from Observer. Thereafter, the Abbotts filed this personal injury action against Lane Bryant. Lane Bryant sought dismissal of the action, arguing the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case due to Abbott's status as a statutory employee and the exclusivity provision of the Workers' Compensation Act. By order dated February 24, 1997, the circuit court agreed with Lane Bryant's position and dismissed the action. This appeal followed.
Discussion
An employer-employee relationship is normally necessary for coverage under the Workers' Compensation Act. McDowell v. Stilley Plywood Co., 210 S.C. 173, 182, 4 S.E.2d 872, 876 (1947) ("In the absence of a statutory provision to the contrary, an injured person who is not an employee, but an independent contractor for the work, is not within the scope of a compensation act . . . ."). Certain statutory exceptions to this rule exist. Statutory employees are one exception.
According to South Carolina Code Ann. ยง 42-1-400 (1985):
"When any person ... referred to as 'owner' undertakes to perform or execute any work which is a part of his trade, business or occupation and contracts with any other person ... for the execution or performance by or under such subcontractor of the whole or any part of the work undertaken by the owner, the owner shall be liable to pay to any workman employed in the work any compensation under this Title which he would have been liable to pay if the workman had been immediately employed by him."
Thus, under certain circumstances, an employer may be liable to pay workers' compensation benefits to a worker not directly employed by the employer. The primary purpose behind section 42-1-400 is to afford the benefits of compensation to workers who are exposed to the risks of business. Parker v. Williams and Madianik, Inc., 275 S.C. 65
Page 1 2 3 South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|