Perez v. The Lamar Group

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Rey Perez, Claimant, Respondent,

v.

The Lamar Group, LLC, and/or Green Valley Country
Club, Employer, and Bridgefield Casualty Insurance
Company, Carrier, Respondents,

and

South Carolina Uninsured Employers Fund, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2017-001422

Appeal From The Workers' Compensation Commission

Unpublished Opinion No. 2019-UP-229
Submitted May 8, 2019 – Filed June 26, 2019

AFFIRMED

David Hill Keller, of Turner Padget Graham & Laney,
PA, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Tracy Welsh Tiddy, of Willson Jones Carter & Baxley,
P.A., of Greenville, for Respondents Green Valley
Country Club and Bridgefield Casualty Insurance
Company.
Kathryn Williams and Donald E. Kamb, Jr., both of
Williams & Kamb, LLC, of Greenville, for Respondent
Rey Perez.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Posey v. Proper Mold & Eng'g, Inc., 378 S.C. 210, 216, 661 S.E.2d
395, 398 (Ct. App. 2008); ("[T]his court has the power and duty to . . . decide the
jurisdictional facts in accord with its view of the preponderance of the evidence.");
S.C. Code Ann. § 42-1-400 (2015) (establishing that a subcontractor's worker is a
statutory employee of an owner if the activity is "part of [the owner's] trade,
business[,] or occupation"); Poch v. Bayshore Concrete Prods./S.C., Inc., 386 S.C.
13, 25, 686 S.E.2d 689, 695 (Ct. App. 2009) (establishing the following three-
factor test for determining whether an activity is in the trade or business of an
owner who hires a contractor or subcontractor: "(1) whether the activity is an
important part of the trade or business, (2) whether the activity is a necessary,
essential and integral part of the business, and (3) whether the identical activity in
question has been performed by employees of the principal employer" (quoting
Bailey v. Owen Elec. Steel Co. of S.C., 298 S.C. 36, 39, 378 S.E.2d 63, 64 (Ct.
App. 1989))); Raines v. Gould, Inc., 288 S.C. 541, 543–47, 343 S.E.2d 655, 657–
59 (Ct. App. 1986) (holding an injured construction worker employed by a
subcontractor was not the statutory employee of a manufacturing company even
when the manufacturer "prepare[d] the specific designs for certain parts of the
facilities . . . overs[aw] such designs, approve[d] engineering plans and, in some
instances, provide[d] supervisory personnel to provide general assistance in the
contacting of the contractors and subcontractors and coordinating their activities").

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, THOMAS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.