Legal Opinion
Higgins's Case
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided November 1, 1933PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLummus, J.
The first question is whether the claimant was an “Employee” under G. L. (Ter.,Ed.) c. 152, § 1, or an independent contractor. He was hired by Sears, Roebuck and Co. to install oil burners in the houses of their customers. Some customers paid Sears, Roebuck and Co. for installation, and others received installation free. Sears, Roebuck and Co. paid the claimant, upon presentation of his account, at the rate of $3 a burner and $2 a coil. One Levy, acting for Sears, Roebuck and Co., told him where to go to do work. The claimant was required to have his own automobile with which to travel to…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Caminetti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Old Colony Railroad v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- McNicol's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Lynch v. Alworth-Stephens Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Old Dominion Copper Mining & Smelting Co. v. BigelowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Demoulas v. Demoulas Super Markets, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Caswell's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Ferullo's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
- Sawyer's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Caira v. CairaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.