Smith v. American Employers Insurance

HARDY, Judge.

This is an action for workmen’s compensation and plaintiff appeals from judgment rejecting his demands.

Plaintiff’s claims are based upon the contentions that he was either an employee of defendant’s assured, C. E. Wilds, or the employee of one Woodrow Haspard, who allegedly occupied the relationship of independent contractor with Wilds as^ principal. As opposed to these contentions it is urged upon behalf of defendant that the relationship between Wilds and Haspard, whó wás plaintiff’s immediate employer, was that of buyer and seller of pulpwood. It is obvious that the…