CompFox AI Summary
Dr. Larry Donald Howard, a medical director for Cornerstone Medical Associates, sustained injuries in an automobile accident while traveling from his home to a nursing home for work. The trial court initially granted summary judgment to the employer, finding the injuries were not sustained in the course of employment, as travel to and from work typically falls outside this scope. The Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel reversed this decision, concluding that Dr. Howard's travel furthered his employer's business and thus his injuries were compensable. However, the Tennessee Supreme Court disagreed with the Panel's recommendation, affirming the trial court's judgment. The Supreme Court ruled that Dr. Howard's travel did not meet the criteria for exceptions to the 'going and coming' rule, such as the 'special errand' or 'traveling employee' exceptions, and therefore his injuries were not compensable.
Howard v. Cornerstone Medical Associates, P.C. is a workers' compensation case decided in Tennessee Supreme Court. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Tennessee Supreme Court.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Dr. Larry Donald Howard, a medical director for Cornerstone Medical Associates, sustained injuries in an automobile accident while traveling from his home to a nursing home for work. The trial court initially granted summary judgment to the employer, finding the injuries were not sustained in the course of employment, as travel to and from work typically falls outside this scope. The Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel reversed this decision, concluding that Dr. Howard's travel furthered his employer's business and thus his injuries were compensable. However, the Tennessee Supreme Court disagreed with the Panel's recommendation, affirming the trial court's judgment. The Supreme Court ruled that Dr. Howard's travel did not meet the criteria for exceptions to the 'going and coming' rule, such as the 'special errand' or 'traveling employee' exceptions, and therefore his injuries were not compensable.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.