Herbst v. Hat Corporation of America
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The amended finding of the commissioner, as corrected, discloses the following facts: The plaintiff is the widow of Julius Herbst, who for fifteen years before his death worked as a maintenance man at the East Norwalk plant of the Hat Corporation of America, hereinafter referred to as the defendant. At about 9:40 a.m. during the regular working hours of Herbst on August 31, 1939, he secured a requisition for five pounds of nails and took it from plant 3 of the defendant to plant 1, situated some little distance away. When Herbst arrived at plant 1 the nails were not obtainable and he started…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Claim of Dependents of Marks v. GrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Bountiful Brick Co. v. GilesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Larke v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Ritchie v. WallerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Mann v. Glastonbury Knitting Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Fair v. People's Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Rawling v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- McNamara v. Town of HamdenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Dombach v. Olkon Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Kolomiets v. Syncor International Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.