Legal Opinion

Ostrem v. Alaska Workmen's Compensation Board

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 1973No. 1809PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BOOCHEVER, Justice.

In this case we are confronted with the question of whether Curtis Ostrem was an employee of either Cummins Alaska Service (Cummins) or Burgess Construction Company (Burgess), or both, so as to be entitled to benefits under the Alaska Workmen’s Compensation Act. 1 The Alaska Workmen’s Compensation Board (the Board) found that he was an independent contractor and not entitled to compensation.

On February 20, 1970 Cummins secured the services of Ostrem to install a rebuilt diesel engine pursuant to warranty into a piece of heavy equipment owned by Burgess Construction…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Laborers & Hod Carriers Union, Local No. 341 v. GroothuisAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Searfus v. Northern Gas CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Anderson v. Employers Liability Assurance Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Reader v. Ghemm Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1971
  5. City of Seward v. WisdomAlaska Supreme Court · 1966

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Benner v. WichmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Childs v. Kalgin Island LodgeAlaska Supreme Court · 1989
  3. M-K Rivers v. SchleifmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Burton v. Crawford and CompanyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. Dibble v. GarciaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1982

14 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