Legal Opinion

Gittelman v. Hoover Company

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 30, 1939No. Appeal, 258PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Stern,

Defendant corporation is engaged in the sale of vacuum cleaners and maintains branch offices in several cities in this and adjoining states. James H. Hoberdier was employed as its office manager in Philadelphia, his principal duty being that of sales promotion, which required that he travel in the surrounding territory and occasionally to the other branch offices. .Whenever he went out of town on defendant’s business it reimbursed him for his expenses, whatever they were, irrespective of the manner in which he chose to travel, the means of transportation he…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wesolowski v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Martin v. LipschitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. Solomon v. Commonwealth Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  4. Holdsworth v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Heinrich v. Pict. Rev. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Gozdonovic v. Pleasant Hills Realty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Lallatin Ex Rel. Lallatin v. TerryIdaho Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Freshkorn v. MariettaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  4. Smith v. Brown-Service Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  5. Chamberlain v. RiddleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944

13 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