Legal Opinion

Wesolowski v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 27, 1932No. Appeals, 137 and 138PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Maxey,

The John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company employed Charles J. Adams to solicit life insurance business and to make weekly collections of premiums. His salary was $15 per week plus commissions on new business. His territory was less than a square mile in the City of Philadelphia. The company had the right to Adams’s exclusive services and to fix his working hours. In covering his territory, Adams sometimes walked and sometimes drove his own Ford car which he maintained and operated at his own expense. The company did not require him to use a car, though the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rodgers Et Ux. v. SaxtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. American National Insurance v. DenkeTexas Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Hayward v. YostIdaho Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Stambaugh v. HayesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1940
  4. American Savings Life Insurance v. RiplingerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
  5. Henkelmann v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1942

54 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