Hudson v. Gulf Oil Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBaeNhill, J.
A contract similar to the one introduced in evidence in this cause has been discussed by this Court recently in the case of Rothrock v. Roberson, 214 N. C., 26. The conclusion there was adverse to tbis plaintiff’s contention. Inman v. Refining Co., 194 N. C., 566, 140 S. E., 289, and other decisions cited in the Rothrocls case, supra, sustain the defendant’s position that under this contract Braddy was an independent contractor and that neither he nor any of his employees were agents or employees of the corporate defendant. The negligence of Braddy and his employees may not be imputed to the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Morrow Ex Rel. Morrow v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Whitehurst v. . ElksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Inman v. Gulf Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Ledford Ex Rel. Ledford v. Tallassee Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Rothrock Ex Rel. Rothrock v. RobersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Pinnix v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- B. P. Oil Corp. v. MabeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
- Leary v. . Land BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Cawthon v. Phillips Petroleum CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
- Newsome v. SurrattSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.