Mayes v. Walter Kidde Constructors, Inc.
New Jersey Department of Labor Workmen's Compensation Bureau
1Opinion of the Court
* sí* # íjí sf« * #
From the stipulation of counsel and the testimony adduced, it appears that the facts in this case are not seriously in dispute. The petitioner was in the employ of the respondent on June 8th, 1942, as a laborer and was receiving wages which would entitle him to a compensation rate of $20 a week. On that date at about 12:80 p. m., the petitioner was engaged in the performance of his duties for the respondent as a buggy pusher. His job was to fill a buggy with concrete at a concrete mixer and push the filled buggy to some portion of the premises where the concrete was to be…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hulley v. MoosbruggerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1915
- Foley v. Home Rubber Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1917
- Merkel v. T. A. Gillespie Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1932
- Emerick v. Slavonian Roman Greek Catholic UnionSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1919
- Patterson v. S. S. Thompson, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.