Massey v. Poteau Trucking Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Griffin Smith, Chief Justice.
The question is whether — as a matter of law based, as it is contended, on undisputed facts — an injured workman who sought compensation under Act 319 of 1939, as amended, (and whose claim was rejected by the commission and circuit court) was an employe of a sub-contractor; or, conversely, was he engaged to do a specific task according to his own methods, without being subject to control except as to results? See Ice Service Company v. Forbess, 180 Ark. 253, 21 S. W. 2d 411, cited in Hobbs-Western Company v. Carmical, 192 Ark. 59, 91 S. W. 2d 605.
Leonard W. Massey…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- In re the Estate of JessupCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- In re the Estate of JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Moore & Chicago Mill & Lumber Co. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Smith.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Brothers v. Dierks Lumber & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Arkansas Transit Homes, Inc. v. Aetna Life & CasualtySupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
- International Paper Company v. TidwellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
- Hopson v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1956
- ConAgra Foods, Inc. v. DraperSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008
- In re Fedex Ground Package System, Inc.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2008
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.