Haygood v. Home Transp. Co., Inc.
| Decision Date | 25 April 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 57115,57115 |
| Parties | HAYGOOD v. HOME TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, INC. et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Long, Weinberg, Ansley & Wheeler, Sidney F. Wheeler, Ben S. Williams, Dan Wingate, Atlanta, for appellant.
Freeman & Hawkins, J. Bruce Welch, H. Lane Young, James S. Owens, Atlanta, for appellees.
Wrongful death action. Appellant, Elizabeth Ann Haygood, brings this appeal from the grant of summary judgment by the trial court to the appellee, Home Transportation Company. The facts show that Home Transportation had a contract with one McElhenney, an independent contractor, to furnish Home Transportation with an interstate driver and rig. McElhenney employed Mrs. Haygood's now deceased husband and caused Haygood to drive for Home Transportation in furtherance of the contract. McElhenney employed less than three employees. It is undisputed that Home Transportation paid workers' compensation premiums to its carrier and covered Haygood as a statutory employee. At the time of his death, Haygood was driving on behalf of Home Transportation. Mrs. Haygood, prior to the institution of this wrongful death action, accepted benefits paid by Home Transportation under the Workers' Compensation Act. Held :
Under theses facts, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to Home Transportation. Within the meaning of the Workers' Compensation Act, Home Transportation was a "principal" employer. Inasmuch as McElhenney employed less than three employees, the Act did not apply to him or his employees. Ga.L.1975, pp. 190, 193 (Code Ann. § 114-107). However, as a "principal," Home Transportation was liable for compensation to Haygood as a statutory employee for injury or death while in the employ of McElhenney as a contractor engaged in business for Home Transport, to the same extent as McElhenney would have been as the immediate employer, had McElhenney been subject to the Act. Ga.L.1969, p. 671 (Code Ann. § 114-112). Under Code Ann. § 114-103, as amended (Ga.L.1972, pp. 929, 930), the rights and remedies granted under the workers' compensation law to an employee excludes all other rights and remedies of such employee, his personal representative, parents, dependents or next-of-kin, or otherwise, on account of such injury, loss of service, or death, other than the employee's right to bring an action against a third-party tortfeasor. The collection of compensation from Home Transport as the statutory employer, bars recovery by Mrs....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hudgins v. Bacon
... ... American Interstate Ins. Co., 158 Ga.App. 220, 225, 279 S.E.2d 517 ... v. Rieder, 247 Ga. 496, 277 S.E.2d 41; Haygood v. Home Transp. Co., 149 Ga.App. 229, 253 S.E.2d 805. The ... ...
-
Haygood v. Home Transp. Co., Inc.
...BOWLES, Justice. Certiorari was granted in this case to review the holding of the Court of Appeals in Haygood v. Home Transportation Co., 149 Ga.App. 229, 253 S.E.2d 805 (1979). There, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Home Transportation Company, ......
-
Samuel v. Baitcher, 59331
...and that other cases following this theory have been brought solely against the employer. E. g., Haygood v. Home Transportation Co., 149 Ga.App. 229, 253 S.E.2d 805 (1979); Fox v. Stanish, 150 Ga.App. 537(1), 258 S.E.2d 190 (1979); Allied Chemical Corp. v. Peacock, 151 Ga.App. 278, 259 S.E.......
-
Capitol Fish Co. v. Tanner
...a remedy for the greater number of eligible employees although it deprives some of a remedy in tort. See also Haygood v. Home Transp. Co., 149 Ga.App. 229, 253 S.E.2d 805. The plaintiff is not in error to say it appears the employer has all the benefits of ignoring the deceased and providin......