Gibson v. Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc.

609 S.E.2d 203, 271 Ga. App. 277, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 172, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 23
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Gibson v. Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 266 Ga. App. 42
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 14, 2005·No. A03A2335·Published

Opinion

Ruffin, Chief Judge.

In Gibson v. Tim’s Crane & Rigging, Inc.,1 we held, inter alia, that issues of fact remained regarding whether a crane operator who [278]*278worked for Tim’s Crane was a “borrowed servant” of the general contractor. Although the contract between Tim’s Crane and the general contractor designated the crane operator as a borrowed servant, we found from the evidence that the operator had special skills and exercised independent judgment, which created a question of fact regarding whether he could abdicate complete control to the general contractor.2 The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed, holding that the contract was dispositive.3 Accordingly, we vacate Division 1 of our earlier opinion and adopt the judgment of the Supreme Court as our own. Division 2 of our opinion was affirmed by the Supreme Court and therefore remains in effect.

Decided January 14, 2005. Savage, Turner, Pinson & Karsman, Brent J. Savage, Christopher D. Britt, Kathryn H. Pinckney, for appellant. Oliver, Maner & Gray, Patricia T. Paul, Jeffery L. Arnold, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Smith, P. J., and Miller, J., concur.

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

Gibson v. Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc., 609 S.E.2d 203, 271 Ga. App. 277, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 172, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 23 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005).

609 S.E.2d 203 (Gibson v. Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc. v. Gibson
604 S.E.2d 763 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Gibson v. Tim's Crane & Rigging, Inc.
596 S.E.2d 215 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2004)