Legal Opinion

Coviello v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 12, 1935No. 25249PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

The sole question presented in this case is whether the relationship of the cab corporation and the plaintiff’s decedent was that of employer and employee within the terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

A written contract was entered into by the company and the plaintiff’s decedent. This contract is in terms an agreement for the lease of a taxicab by the former to the latter. For the use of this taxicab for a twelve-hour period, a flat rental charge was fixed, and an additional rental agreed upon, six and one-half cents for every mile in excess of one hundred miles during such twelve-hour…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Western Indemnity Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Matter of Glielmi v. Netherland Dairy Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
  3. Rockefeller v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Hawker's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Gillum v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Guy v. Arthur H. Thomas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Hannigan v. GoldfarbNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
  4. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. WindhamSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
  5. United States v. Mutual Trucking Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1944

39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API