Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Employment Security Commission v. Kermon

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 7, 1950PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.

The plaintiff is seeking to collect certain contributions from the defendant company which it contends are duo under the so-called contractor’s clause, formerly known as G-.S. 96-8 (f) (8), now repealed and which reads as follows: “‘Employer’ means (8) Any employing unit, which contracts with or has under it any contractor or subcontractor for any employment which is part of its usual trade, occupation, profession, or business, and each such contractor or subcontractor irrespective of the place of performance of contract; provided, the employing unit would be an employer by reason of any…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Beach v. . McLeanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  2. Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  3. Lockey v. . Cohen, Goldman Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  4. Roach v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  5. State Ex Rel. Unemployment Compensation Commission v. BarberSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Amanini v. N.C. Department of Human ResourcesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  2. Bragg Development Co. v. BraxtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. Duke v. State ex rel. ShawSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. State Ex Rel. Employment Security Commission v. Paul's Young Men's Shop, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  5. In Re StevensonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953

12 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