Kreinbrock v. Virginia Power

Surry County Circuit Court

Kreinbrock v. Virginia Power

49 Va. Cir. 159, 1999 Va. Cir. LEXIS 296

DecidedJune 4, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 49 Va. Cir. 159 (Kreinbrock v. Virginia Power) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Surry County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kreinbrock v. Virginia Power, 49 Va. Cir. 159, 1999 Va. Cir. LEXIS 296 (Va. Super. Ct. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

By Judge Robert G. O’Hara, Jr.

The stipulated and/or undisputed facts are as follows. The defendant, Virginia Power, is a public utility; defendant, Fluor Daniel, Inc., and Westinghouse were contracted by Virginia Power to refuel its Surry Power Station. Plaintiff, Kreinbrock, was an employee of Westinghouse. The refueling was mandated by § 56-234 of the Code of Virginia, specifically requiring defendant, Virginia Power, to provide “treasonably adequate service.” And, in the course of the refueling process, the plaintiff was injured.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff was performing work as a part of the defendant’s (Virginia Power) trade, business, or occupation. Under the provisions of § 65.2-302 of the Code of Virginia, the plaintiff was a statutory employee of Virginia Power. The plaintiffs right to recovery is therefore limited to that afforded under Virginia Workers’ Compensation Laws. The Court relied in major part on Henderson v. Central Tel Co. of Va., 233 Va. 377 (1987); Ford v. City of Richmond, 239 Va. 664 (1990); and Roberts v. City of Alexandria, 246 Va. 17 (1993).

Accordingly, the Defendant’s Special Plea will be sustained.

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

By Judge Robert G. O’Hara, Jr.

The stipulated and/or undisputed facts are as follows. The defendant, Virginia Power, is a public utility; defendant, Fluor Daniel, Inc., and Westinghouse were contracted by Virginia Power to refuel its Surry Power Station. Plaintiff, Kreinbrock, was an employee of Westinghouse. The refueling was mandated by § 56-234 of the Code of Virginia, specifically requiring defendant, Virginia Power, to provide “treasonably adequate service.” And, in the course of the refueling process, the plaintiff was injured.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff was performing work as a part of the defendant’s (Virginia Power) trade, business, or occupation. Under the provisions of § 65.2-302 of the Code of Virginia, the plaintiff was a statutory employee of Virginia Power. The plaintiffs right to recovery is therefore limited to that afforded under Virginia Workers’ Compensation Laws. The Court relied in major part on Henderson v. Central Tel Co. of Va., 233 Va. 377 (1987); Ford v. City of Richmond, 239 Va. 664 (1990); and Roberts v. City of Alexandria, 246 Va. 17 (1993).

Accordingly, the Defendant’s Special Plea will be sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 Va. Cir. 159, 1999 Va. Cir. LEXIS 296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kreinbrock-v-virginia-power-vaccsurry-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack