Legal Opinion

Whitney v. Mountain States Motors Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 6, 1940No. 14,629PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PLAINTIFFS in error are hereinafter referred to as Whitney and the commission, and defendants in error as Motors and the Globe, respectively.

Whitney did work for Motors whose industrial insurance was carried by the Globe. He sustained an injury in the course of and growing out of that work and filed his claim with the commission which awarded him compensation. The district court set aside that award and to review its judgment this writ is prosecuted. The crucial question is, Was Whitney an employee as held by the commission, or an independent contractor as held by the court?

[1] If the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Industrial Commission v. HammondSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
  2. Industrial Commission v. Continental Investment Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1925
  3. Arnold v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Deines Bros. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1952
  2. Industrial Commission v. SantarelliSupreme Court of Colorado · 1942
  3. Neely-Towner Motor Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1951
  4. Hassebroch v. Weaver Construction CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1954
  5. Hassebroch v. Weaver Construction CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API