Claim of McAllister v. Cobb

On the facts stated above it is contended by the claimant that the employer was engaged in the business of custom or commercial wood sawing, with a tractor and buzz saw, and that claimant was not employed in farm labor, at the time of the accident, as those activities are contemplated in the commdn speech of people and in the Workmen’s Compensation Law, and cites in support of his contention Adams v. Ross (230 App. Div. 216); Vincent v. Taylor Bros. (180 id. 818), and White v. Loades (178 id. 236). The Adams Case (supra) was one in which the employer was a retired man of wealth who lived on a…