Agency -- 1961 Tennessee Survey (II)

Bigham, W. Harold

Journal: Vanderbilt Law Review

Volume: 15

First Page: 838

Year: 1962

Bluebook Citation: 15 VAND. L. REV. 838 (1962)

Author: W. Harold Bigham: all 8 publications


Abstract

I. Employee and Independent Contractor Distinguished During the abbreviated survey period there were no significant or momentous decisions by Tennessee courts--state or federal--involving agency principles. Indeed the only state appellate case properly to be considered here involved the rather pedestrian question of whether a petitioner for workmen's compensation benefits was, vis-a-vis the defendant prime contractor, an employee or an independent contractor. ================================= II. Misrepresentations of Agent Butts v. Colonial Refrigerated Transportation, Inc. is merely another example of the Sixth Circuit's unfortunate proclivity for writing per curiam affirmances. It is well-nigh impossible to determine whether the liability of the defendant which the court affirmed sounded in tort for deceit or was based on breach of contract. In any case the liability resulted from certain false statements made by the defendant's authorized agent, the plaintiffs having relied on the statements to their detriment.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.