Big Doubles Coal Co. v. Bates

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Big Doubles Coal Co. v. Bates

447 S.W.2d 355, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 81

CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky

DecidedNovember 21, 1969

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 447 S.W.2d 355 (Big Doubles Coal Co. v. Bates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Big Doubles Coal Co. v. Bates, 447 S.W.2d 355, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 81 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

CLAY, Commissioner.

In this workmen’s compensation case ap-pellee’s claim was dismissed by the Workmen’s Compensation Board on the ground that appellee was not an employee of appellant but was an independent contractor. On appeal the circuit court reversed the Board.

Appellant was in the coal mining business. Appellee conducted several independent enterprises, on his own initiative, including carpentry work, sawing logs and making mine props. By oral agreement appellee was engaged to furnish appellant 6,000 mine props at 12 cents each. Where they were to be produced or procured was not specified. The props appellee furnished to appellant were cut on his own land, where the injury was sustained. Ap-pellee owned his own tools, determined his own work schedule, employed others to help him and paid for transportation. He supplied mine props to other mines in the area. In making payment for props received, appellant did not withhold any amounts for social security, unemployment insurance or income taxes. There was no time limit fixed for the furnishing of these timbers.

From a recitation of the above facts it is difficult to find a single element which [356]*356would create the employer-employee relationship. See Johnson v. Byrne & Speed Coal Corporation, 271 Ky. 216, 111 S.W.2d 671 (1937), and Ratliff v. Redmon, Ky., 396 S.W.2d 320 (1965). By any standard appellee was an independent contractor.

Appellee relies on Brewer v. Millich, Ky., 276 S.W.2d 12 (1955), and Partin-Lambdin Lumber Company v. Frazier, Ky., 308 S.W.2d 792 (1958). Among the many distinguishing features of those cases were: the work the employee was hired to do was the principal business of the employer; the employer exercised control of the details of the work; and the employer treated the hired person as an employee. The facts found by the Board (which appellee says are substantially undisputed) lead inevitably to the conclusion (be it one of fact or law) that appellee was an independent contractor.

The judgment is reversed, with directions to reinstate the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CLAY, Commissioner.

In this workmen’s compensation case ap-pellee’s claim was dismissed by the Workmen’s Compensation Board on the ground that appellee was not an employee of appellant but was an independent contractor. On appeal the circuit court reversed the Board.

Appellant was in the coal mining business. Appellee conducted several independent enterprises, on his own initiative, including carpentry work, sawing logs and making mine props. By oral agreement appellee was engaged to furnish appellant 6,000 mine props at 12 cents each. Where they were to be produced or procured was not specified. The props appellee furnished to appellant were cut on his own land, where the injury was sustained. Ap-pellee owned his own tools, determined his own work schedule, employed others to help him and paid for transportation. He supplied mine props to other mines in the area. In making payment for props received, appellant did not withhold any amounts for social security, unemployment insurance or income taxes. There was no time limit fixed for the furnishing of these timbers.

From a recitation of the above facts it is difficult to find a single element which [356]*356would create the employer-employee relationship. See Johnson v. Byrne & Speed Coal Corporation, 271 Ky. 216, 111 S.W.2d 671 (1937), and Ratliff v. Redmon, Ky., 396 S.W.2d 320 (1965). By any standard appellee was an independent contractor.

Appellee relies on Brewer v. Millich, Ky., 276 S.W.2d 12 (1955), and Partin-Lambdin Lumber Company v. Frazier, Ky., 308 S.W.2d 792 (1958). Among the many distinguishing features of those cases were: the work the employee was hired to do was the principal business of the employer; the employer exercised control of the details of the work; and the employer treated the hired person as an employee. The facts found by the Board (which appellee says are substantially undisputed) lead inevitably to the conclusion (be it one of fact or law) that appellee was an independent contractor.

The judgment is reversed, with directions to reinstate the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

447 S.W.2d 355, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 81, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/big-doubles-coal-co-v-bates-kyctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack