Unemployment Compensation Commission v. City Ice & Coal Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.
Are the three corporate defendants “owned and controlled . . . directly or indirectly by the same interests” witbin the meaning of section 19 (f), (4) of the N. C. Unemployment Compensation Act (chapter 1, Public Laws, Ex. Session, 1936) ? We think they are. As this question is answered in the affirmative, it becomes unnecessary to pass upon the incidental question as to the status of nonsalaried, corporate officers as “employees” of said corporation.
The agreed statement of facts presents a clear picture of three affiliated corporate enterprises, whose stock is closely held in a family…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Unemployment Compensation Com. v. . Ins. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Abernethy v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Supply Co. v. . Maxwell, Comr. of RevenueSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Manning v. Atlantic & Yadkin Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Bergere v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Creameries of America, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1940
- New Haven Metal & Heating Supply Co. v. DanaherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
- Gibson Products Co. v. MurphySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1940
- Zehender & Factor, Inc. v. MurphyIllinois Supreme Court · 1944
- Maryland Unemployment Compensation Board v. AlbrechtCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.