Legal Opinion

Caraher v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 9, 1938PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The vital questions upon this appeal are whether the plaintiff was an employee or an independent contractor, and if he was an employee whether he was guilty of serious and wilful misconduct barring his right to compensation. The finding, with those corrections to which the defendant is entitled, discloses these material facts upon those issues. The defendant is a self-insurer conducting a store in Bridgeport. It had engaged the plaintiff to install and repair radios, either in the service shop in its store or at the home of its customers. He did this work on the basis of $1 per job plus…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hillen v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Tuttle v. Embury-Martin Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Thompson v. TwissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
  4. Hartley v. Red Ball Transit Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Kelley's Dependents v. Hoosac Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1921

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Doe v. Yale UniversitySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
  2. Jones v. GoodsonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1941
  3. Bauer v. Waste Management of Connecticut, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  4. Beaverdale Memorial Park, Inc. v. DanaherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
  5. Darling v. Burrone Bros., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1972

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API