Skip to main content

Murray v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Citations

  • 46 S.W.3d 171
  • 2001 Tenn. LEXIS 418
  • 2001 WL 523315

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a painting job was not a regular part of the business because it was more extensive and specialized than a regular maintenance project
  • holding that a painting job was not a regular part of the business because it was more extensive and specialized than a regular maintenance project
  • holding that a painting job was not a regular part of the business because it was more extensive and specialized than a regular maintenance project
  • holding that a painting job was not a regular part of the business because it was more extensive and specialized than a regular maintenance project
  • “However, our legislature has extended this relationship and has made principal contractors liable under certain circumstances for injuries sustained by the employees of subcontractors[.]”
  • painter injured when air duct collapsed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Justice William M. Barker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.