7 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1992–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Copeland v. Leaf, Inc.green2 sentences2016The Supreme Court further extended the premises rule in Copeland v. Leaf, Inc., 829 S.W.2d 140, 144 (Tenn. 1992). 1998We continue to follow the premises rule as adopted in Lollar and Copeland, supra. In cases where an employee is injured while en route to or from work, the injury is in the course of employment if it occurs on the employer’s premises or on a necessary route between the work facility and the areas provided for employee parking. | 4 | 4 |
Dupper v. Liberty Mutual Insurancegreen2 sentences1992Co., 105 N.M. 503, 506 , 734 P.2d 743, 746 (1987): ... by adoption of the premises rule, we simply recognize that the “course of employment” includes not only the time for which the employee is actually paid but also a reasonable time during which the employee is necessarily on the employer’s premises while passing to or from the place where the work is actually done. 1992Co., 105 N.M. 503, 506 , 734 P.2d 743, 746 (1987): ... by adoption of the premises rule, we simply recognize that the “course of employment” includes not only the time for which the employee is actually paid but also a reasonable time during which the employee is necessarily on the employer’s premises while passing to or from the place where the work is actually done. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bennett v. Langham
green
1 sentence2000The common law rule placing precedence on the premises clause should be utilized “as a last resort.” Id. at 20 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Adair v. Metropolitan Building Co
green
2 sentences1992Co., 38 Mich.App. 393 , 196 N.W.2d 335 (1972) (While proceeding from employer’s premises to a parking lot owned by the employer, employee was injured while walking on a driveway owned by another company. 1992Co., 38 Mich.App. 393 , 196 N.W.2d 335 (1972) (While proceeding from employer’s premises to a parking lot owned by the employer, employee was injured while walking on a driveway owned by another company. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.