Legal Opinion
Cumbo v. E. B. McGurk, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 9, 1938PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The question upon this appeal is whether the commissioner was warranted in concluding that the plaintiff was an employee of the named defendant, and not an independent contractor. The finding, including corrections to which the defendants are entitled, shows these facts relevant to this issue. The named defendant, referred to herein as the defendant, is a contractor engaged in highway construction work but has no trucks of its own. The plaintiff had a Ford dump truck. The defendant agreed to pay him $1.50 per hour for his personal services and the use of the truck, less his charges for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hall v. SeraSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Caraher v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Tierney v. CorreiaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Tortorici v. Sharp Moosop, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Slosberg v. Town of NorwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Spring Brook Farm Dairy, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
- Owens v. American National Red CrossDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1987
- Aetna Insurance v. BlumenthalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- Bieluczyk v. Crown Petroleum CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
- Bourgeois v. CacciapuotiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.