Legal Opinion

Wuertz v. Howard

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1966No. 8062PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JOE W. WOOD, Judge, Court of Appeals.

The issue is whether plaintiff was a special employee. We hold that he was.

' Delhi-Taylor Oil Corporation contracted with Sharp Drilling Company (hereinafter referred to as Sharp) to drill a well on its oil well drilling location. Delhi-Taylor also contracted with Halliburton Company (hereinafter referred to as Halliburton) to furnish cementing service for the well. Plaintiff was on the location as a general employee of Sharp. Howard was on the location as an employee of Halliburton.

Howard was transferring cement from a Halliburton truck to a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Jones v. George F. Getty Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1937
  2. Rhinelander Paper Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Shipman v. MacCo CorporationNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Bogart v. HesterNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Beal Ex Rel. Boatwright v. Southern Union Gas Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1956

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Monett v. Dona Ana County Sheriff's PosseNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. Rivera v. Sagebrush Sales, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1994
  3. Barger v. Ford Sales Company, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. Lindsey v. Bucyrus-ErieCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
  5. Growers Co. v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992

1 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