Benoy v. Torkelson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
The employe was awarded compensation, and on certiorari the employer attacks the same on the ground that (a) the employe at the time of the injury was working as a farm laborer; (b) that his employment was casual; and (c) that he was not employed in the usual course of the trade, business, profession or occupation of the employer.
The finding is that the employe was employed as a carpenter. He was engaged in building a potato warehouse when injured, and, unless the erection of such warehouse was incidental to the operation of a farm, the finding obviously cannot be disturbed. This will be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State ex rel. City of Northfield v. District Court of Rice CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Klein v. McClearySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- State ex rel. Lundgren v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
3Cited by14 opinions
- O'Rourke v. Percy Vittum Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Austin v. Leonard, Crossett & Riley, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Eichholz v. ShaftSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Greischar v. St. Mary's CollegeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- State Ex Rel. Bettman v. ChristenOhio Supreme Court · 1934
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.