Paradis Case
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1Opinion of the CourtDunn, J.
In assenting, as he requisitely did in writing, to the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, this employer, without mentioning any other business, specified his business as that of general hardware, tinsmithing and plumbing in a store and shop at Caribou, which hereinafter will be called the store.
An employment of the injured employee came within that assent. He operated trucks, hauled freight, unpacked and delivered goods, did heavy work, and at times unloaded cars. His duties varied, however, and were divided between the store and the house of his employer. At the employer’s house…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Olsen's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
3Cited by7 opinions
- Campos v. Garden City Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1949
- Maley v. MartinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1943
- Wedge v. ButlerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1939
- Eddy v. Bangor Furniture Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1936
- Phillips v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1945
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.