Higley v. Woodford
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
The single question presented by this reservation is the correctness of the commissioner’s conclusion, upon the facts found, that the plaintiff was not an employee of the defendant but an independent contractor and hence not entitled to compensation. The arrangement between the parties, as found by the commissioner, was that the plaintiff should cut trees on certain lands of the defendant, starting at the edge of the wood-lot, and cutting such trees as, when dressed down, would furnish, in the plaintiff’s opinion, lumber of certain dimensions, and was to receive compensation therefor at the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lassen v. Stamford Transit Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Morganelli v. City of DerbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Battey v. OsborneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
3Cited by4 opinions
- Tortorici v. Sharp Moosop, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- North Chesapeake Beach Land & Improvement Co. v. CochranCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1929
- Manning v. Woodland Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Hanson v. Transportation General, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1998