Jarrard v. Doyle
| Decision Date | 08 November 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 64967,64967 |
| Citation | 297 S.E.2d 301,164 Ga.App. 339 |
| Parties | JARRARD v. DOYLE et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Edward H. Kellogg, Paul D. Hermann, Atlanta, C. Neal Pope, Phenix City, Ala., for appellant.
A. Rowland Dye, Thomas W. Tucker, Augusta, for appellees.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment entered on a directed verdict for the defendants in a personal injury action. At issue is the applicability of the "borrowed servant rule."
The plaintiff was employed as a painter for the Bon Air Residential Hotel in Augusta, Georgia. On February 9, 1981, he was instructed by his supervisor to assist Larry Doyle, an employee of Hardy Plumbing Company, Inc., in lifting some pipe to the roof so that some plumbing repairs could be carried out. Hardy Plumbing Company, Inc., had been retained by the hotel to perform this work as an independent contractor.
As Doyle was lifting a section of pipe to the roof, it dislodged a piece of concrete which allegedly fell on the plaintiff and injured him. After collecting worker's compensation benefits from the hotel, he sued both Doyle and Hardy Plumbing Company in tort to collect for the same injuries.
The plaintiff testified that his instructions from his supervisor were to "go help Hardy Plumbing Company get some pipes up on the roof so they can do some repair work." During the period that he was assisting in this task, the hotel could have taken him off the project and assigned him to other work at any time. However, it is undisputed that he was under the direction and control of Doyle and Hardy Plumbing Company insofar as his work on this task was concerned. Doyle testified that in the event he had been dissatisfied with the plaintiff's work or no longer needed him, he "could have dismissed him from what I was using him for ..." Held:
1. "[I]n order for an employee to be a borrowed employee, the evidence must show that '(1) the special master had complete control and direction of the servant for the occasion; (2) the general master had no such control, and (3) the special master had the exclusive right to discharge the servant.' " Six Flags Over Georgia, Inc. v. Hill, 247 Ga. 375, 377, 276 S.E.2d 572 (1981), quoting U.S. Fidelity &c. Co. v. Forrester, 230 Ga. 182, 183, 196 S.E.2d 133 (1973). (Emphasis supplied.) Each of these criteria is satisfied in this case. Hardy Plumbing Company clearly had the exclusive right to control and direct the plaintiff's work on the particular task in question, as well as to dismiss him from that task for unsatisfactory performance. The plaintiff's contention that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Garden City v. Herrera
...on our Supreme Court's decision Six Flags Over Ga., Inc. v. Hill,13 as well as this Court's decisions in Preston v. Ga. Power Co.14 and Jarrard v. Doyle.15 But before considering the foregoing precedents, we return to the Agreement, which is controlling in determining West's employment stat......
-
Preston v. Georgia Power Co.
...relationship." Sheets, supra at 279, 387 S.E.2d 155. This result is consistent with our earlier holding in Jarrard v. Doyle, 164 Ga.App. 339, 340, 297 S.E.2d 301 (1982). In Jarrard, a hotel employee was temporarily assigned to assist a contractor in performing repair work on the hotel and t......
-
Bosch v. Perry, 66371
... ... See generally, Freeman v. Pumpco, Inc., 167 Ga.App. 312, 306 S.E.2d 385 (1983); Jarrard v. Doyle, 164 Ga.App ... 339, 297 S.E.2d 301 (1982). Thus, a special master employing a borrowed servant who is a general servant of a general ... ...
-
Bexley v. Southwire Co.
...right to discharge the servant.' [Cit.]" Six Flags Over Ga. v. Hill, 247 Ga. 375, 377, 276 S.E.2d 572 (1981). See Jarrard v. Doyle, 164 Ga.App. 339(1), 297 S.E.2d 301 (1982). Accordingly, under OCGA § 34-9-11 (Code Ann. § 114-103), both Mr. Bexley and Mr. Harrison were employees of Southwir......