Legal Opinion

Meyer v. Piggly Wiggly No. 24, Inc.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 14, 2000No. 25066PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice:

We granted a writ of certiorari in this negligence action to review the Court of Appeals’ decision finding petitioner (Piggly Wiggly) was not respondent Meyer’s statutory employer and therefore was not immune from suit. We affirm.

FACTS

Meyer was employed as a route salesman for Derst Baking Company (Vendor). He delivered cake products for Vendor to various retail stores, including Piggly Wiggly, for a guaranteed salary plus an 8% commission on all products delivered. Meyer ordered products from a master inventory list that indicated the products authorized by Piggly Wiggly and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Glass v. Dow Chemical Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1997
  2. Hopkins v. Darlington Veneer Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1946
  3. Wilson v. Daniel International Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1973
  4. Parker v. National Super Markets, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. Pyett v. Marsh Plywood Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1962

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hammock v. United StatesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2003
  2. Edens v. BelliniCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2004
  3. Kelly v. TRC Fabrication LLCIdaho Supreme Court · 2021
  4. Posey v. Proper Mold & Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008
  5. Alcala v. Verbruggen Palletizing Solutions, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2023

7 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