Court Opinion

ID: 9739549
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:17:25.212543+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:12.917177
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Judge,
concurring in result.
I concur in the reversal of the summary judgment entered in favor of Property Owners Insurance Company and in the remand for further proceedings as to the factual status of Byron Carter whether as an employee or as an independent contractor of Three Star, Inc.
However, I respectfully dissent from the gratuitous conclusions reached by the majority with respect to the ten-factor analysis drawn from the Restatement of Agency.
I agree that the evidence designated to the trial court for purposes of summary judgment does not lead to a conclusion, as a matter of law, that Carter was an employee of Three Star, Inc. However, I believe it to be inappropriate for this court to assess that evidence and to conclude, with regard to any particular factor, that such factor weighs in favor of one status or the other.
The analysis of the evidence by the trier of fact should be governed by the instructions given by the court if there is a trial by jury or, if by bench trial by independent application of the evidence adduced at trial. That evidence assessment and the conclusion drawn from all of the evidence should not be tainted by our premature suggestions.