Mitchem v. Shearman Concrete Pipe Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
1. Where one is employed generally to perform certain services for another, and there is no specific contract to do a certain piece of work according to specifications for a stipulated sum, it is inferable that the employer has retained the right to control the manner, method, and means of the performance of the contract, and that *810the employee is not an independent contractor. Where a person is employed to travel over a general territory designated by the employer, at a fixed salary per month, with traveling and hotel expenses paid by the employer, to solicit orders from prospective…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. SumrellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Fielder v. DavisonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
- Press Publishing Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Reaves v. Columbus Electric & Power Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- Industrial Commission v. HammondSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Stockwell v. MorrisWyoming Supreme Court · 1933
- Warner v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. SkinnerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- Dawson Motor Co. v. PettyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
- Golosh v. Cherokee Cab CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1970
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.