Towner v. Hosea O. Weaver & Sons
Docket: 1910860
Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; March 4, 1993; Alabama; State Supreme Court
The case of Louise Gordon Towner, et al. v. Hosea O. Weaver, Sons, et al. involves a wrongful death lawsuit following the death of Freddie Towner at a construction site due to a trench collapse. The Supreme Court of Alabama reviewed the jury's verdict favoring the defendant, Weaver, focusing on two main issues: 1) whether the trial court erred in rejecting the plaintiffs' proposed jury instructions regarding the criteria for determining employee versus independent contractor status, and 2) whether the trial court misrepresented the law concerning the "loaned servant" doctrine in its jury instructions. The court found that the trial court's jury instructions on independent contractors were inadequate, necessitating the plaintiffs' requested instructions. Critical to the case was whether Hilliard, the operator of the backhoe provided by Weaver, was an employee of Weaver or a loaned servant under B. G.'s control at the time of Towner's death. If Hilliard was deemed a loaned servant, it would categorize him as a co-employee of Towner, thus potentially barring the plaintiffs' claim under the Workers' Compensation Act. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Weaver but was deadlocked regarding the liability of Jones, B. G.'s supervisor. The trial court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a new trial against Weaver and issued a final judgment. The plaintiffs subsequently appealed the decision. The court emphasized that the classification of Hilliard's employment status was a pivotal issue for jury determination. The trial court refused the plaintiffs' proposed jury instruction regarding the determination of employee versus independent contractor status, which emphasized that the key factor is the reserved right to control the means of work rather than actual control. The plaintiffs argued that this refusal denied the jury the chance to find that Ladon Hilliard was under the control of an independent contractor, Hosea O. Weaver and Sons, despite evidence supporting that claim. The trial court's instructions did not adequately address the reserved right of control nor did they clarify how the jury could find in the plaintiffs' favor if Hilliard was deemed an employee of an independent contractor. The court has a duty to provide complete and correct instructions to jurors, and the lack of such guidance warranted a new trial. Furthermore, the plaintiffs contended that the trial court erred in granting Weaver's instruction on the loaned servant doctrine, which they argued was an incorrect statement of the law regarding control. However, their objection was deemed insufficiently specific for review. Ultimately, the court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial due to the incomplete jury instructions.