Legal Opinion

Southard v. Kleinsmith

New Jersey Department of Labor Workmen's Compensation Bureau

Decided January 31, 1941PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The vital question for determination is whether the petitioner at the time of the admitted accident was an employe of the respondent within the meaning and purview of the Workmen’s Compensation act; or an independent contractor.

It appears from the undisputed facts developed in the evidence that the petitioner sustained serious injuries consisting of a fracture of the left femur, fracture of the left radius, fracture of the left scaphoid hone, dislocation of the semi-lunar and cuneiform hones of the left wrist, rib injuries and nervous shock, as a result of an accident on August 7th, 1940,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Forrester v. EckersonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
  2. In Re the Census SuperintendentSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1885

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Marvin A. Ball v. David Mathews, Secretary of Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
  2. Com. v. Warris, R.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  3. Marvin A. Ball v. David Mathews, Secretary of Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API