Spicer Rudstrom, PLLC • Attorneys at Law • Est. 1963  •
Home |

General Exceptions to the “Coming and Going Rule:” Supreme Court of Tennessee Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel Summary, Paula Dugger v. Home Health Care of Middle Tennessee, et al.

General Exceptions to the “Coming and Going Rule:” Supreme Court of Tennessee Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel Summary, Paula Dugger v. Home Health Care of Middle Tennessee, et al.

April 19, 2017

By Courtney S. Paterson

Paula Dugger v. Home Health Care of Middle Tennessee, et al.                   

Docket No. 2015-05-0341      

File No. M2016-01284-SC-R3-WC

Filed March 15, 2017

Posture

This is a case before the Supreme Court of Tennessee Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel on appeal filed by the employee, and the dispute was whether the trial court erred in granting the employer’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing the claim.

The employee, Paula Dugger, filed a petition for benefit determination seeking medical and temporary disability benefits. The trial court issued an order denying those requested benefits, as it was determined she was not injured in the course of her employment. Ms. Dugger was injured in an automobile while she was returning home after attempting to travel to a patient’s home to administer care.

Ms. Dugger appealed that decision, and the Appeals Board affirmed the trial court’s findings for two reasons: She was not a traveling employee, and her accident did not fall within any exception to the “coming and going” rule. Her employer, Home Health Care of Middle Tennessee, then moved for summary judgment, and the trial court issued an order granting summary judgment.

The Supreme Court Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel reversed and remanded that decision, finding the unique facts of this case fall within the general exception to the “coming and going” rule. The Court held that the journey itself was clearly a substantial part of the services for which the employee was employed. The employer is in the business of providing in-home nursing care to its patients. Although there was an office where the employee reported, her primary job responsibility consisted of traveling and rendering healthcare to patients in their homes.

 

An associate with Spicer Rudstrom since 2009, Courtney focuses her practice on automobile liability, insurance coverage litigation, insurance defense litigation, insurance subrogation, premises liability, products liability and workers’ compensation. She is admitted to practice in all trial and appellate state courts in Tennessee, as well as the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.

 

Related Articles

Employee’s Request for Continuance of Trial on Eve of Trial

Appeals Board Holds that Sleep Deprivation Caused Truck Driver’s Fainting Episode

Street Risk Doctrine


ABOUT SPICER RUDSTROM PLLC

Spicer Rudstrom PLLC was founded in 1963 and currently has more than 35 attorneys with offices in Memphis, Nashville, Chattanooga, Knoxville, Little Rock and Texarkana. We offer representation across industries, including construction, real estate, employment, medical malpractice, retail and hospitality, trucking and transportation, and business. Our clients range from local and national businesses to international companies seeking business, legal and litigation services. The firm’s commitment to its clients and its entrepreneurial spirit drives Spicer Rudstrom to be the premier litigation firm in the South. For more information, visit www.spicerfirm.com.


© 2017 Spicer Rudstrom PLLC | Disclaimer | Site Map

The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.


Spicer Rudstrom is a member of the International Society of Primerus Law Firms.
Spicer Rudstrom Celebrating Our 50th Anniversary.