Bubis v. Flockhart Foundry Co.
New Jersey Department of Labor Workmen's Compensation Bureau
1Opinion of the Court
The material facts as developed in the evidence are not in dispute, and are essentially as follows: Petitioner was regularly employed as a chipper by the respondent, whose business, as its name would impart, was that of operating a foundry. His duties consisted of chipping rough edges from castings by means of an automatic chipping machine. He *300received for his said services an average weekly wage of $26.25, being one-fourth of the gross weekly earnings of a crew composed of himself and three other co-workers. Petitioner and his crew worked principally in a large foundry room, situated on the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Reimers v. Proctor Publishing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1914
- Zabriskie v. Erie RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
- Kolaszynski v. KlieSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1917
- Hanna v. Erie RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
- Smith v. CorsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fuhs v. SwensonWyoming Supreme Court · 1942
- Waskevitz v. Clifton Paper Board Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Dewar v. General Motors Corp., New Jersey Department of Labor Workmen's Compensation Bureau1941
- Rosenberg v. Biboni & Co.New York County Court, Essex County · 1947