Nixon v. Webber-Riley Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 06 April 1951 |
| Docket Number | WEBBER-RILEY,No. 7691,7691 |
| Citation | 229 P.2d 997,71 Idaho 238 |
| Parties | NIXON v.LUMBER CO. et al. |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
E. B. Smith, Boise, for appellant.
Anderson & Thomas and Samuel Kaufman Jr., all of Boise, for respondent.
Appellant, Webber-Riley Lumber Co., is a co-partnership.At the time involved in this case, such appellant was conducting a lumber yard in Mountain Home.Sidney W. Webber was one of the partners and manager of the lumber yard.Appellant lumber company had purchased the output of several sawmills operating in adjacent territory.The lumber company had two 'contract haulers' hauling the lumber from the sawmills to its lumber yard.Such contract haulers had written contracts and were paid from $8.00 to $9.00 per thousand board feet, depending upon the distance the lumber was hauled.
Respondent, in June, 1948, purchased a Ford truck.Prior thereto, he had been employed as foreman in a garage in Mountain Home.He purchased a commercial license for the truck in order to be protected in any kind of hauling he might thereafter do.On or about June 21, 1948, respondent became engaged in hauling lumber for appellant lumber company.While engaged in such work, he sustained the injury involved in this action.
It was the duty of appellant lumber comany to keep the docks clear at the sawmills in order that the work of the mills night not be retarded.Also, the lumber company had contracted for the output of at least one additional small mill.The contract haulers were not able to keep up with the required hauling and appellant lumber company consulted with them about putting on some extra haulers to which they had no objection.
Mr. Webber, manager of appellant lumber company, got in touch with respondent and engaged him to help in the extra hauling.The terms of the oral agreement between the parties are described by such manager in his testimony as follows:
'
According to the further testimony of Mr. Webber, respondent was not engaged to haul any definite amount of lumber; he could be discharged at any time by the lumber company; he could quit at any time; and nothing was said between the parties about any withholding tax or social security benefits.
In pursuance of the agreement, respondent commenced to haul lumber for the Webber-Riley Lumber Co.He would report to the lumber yard each morning and would be directed to the mill to which he was to go to get a load of lumber.When he returned, he was shown where to pile the lumber in the yard.The lumber, being of different grades, was piled in different places.The hauling became so heavy and involved such long hours that respondent, on several trips, took with him one Chet Kimball, whom he was breaking in as a helper.On the morning of July 16, 1948, while unloading his load of lumber in the lumber yard, respondent received the accidental injury to his leg involved herein.Chet Kimball thereafter continued to do some hauling and was paid for all his services by respondent.The lumber company paid respondent weekly for the amount of lumber he had hauled.
Respondent duly filed his claim for compensation with the Industrial Accident Board; the appellants answered; and a hearing was had.The board made an order of award of compensation to respondent.From such order, appellants have appealed to this court.
The only question raised on the appeal is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hassebroch v. Weaver Const. Co.
...v. George R. Cook Co., 201 Mich. 540, 167 N.W. 925; Rouse v. Town of Bird Island, 169 Minn. 367, 211 N.W. 327; Nixon v. Webber-Riley Lbr. Co., 71 Idaho 238, 229 P.2d 997; Showers v. Lund, 123 Neb. 56, 242 N.W. 258; Standish v. Larsen-Merryweather Co., 124 Neb. 197, 245 N.W. 606; Columbia Sc......
-
Merrill v. Duffy Reed Const. Co.
...E. T. Chapin Co. v. Scott, 44 Idaho 566, 260 P. 172; Horst v. Southern Idano Oil Co., 49 Idaho 58, 286 P. 369; Nixon v. Webber-Riley Lumber Co., 71 Idaho 238, 229 P.2d 997. The right of supervision, if retained, does not alter the independent contractor relationship. Joslin v. Idaho Times P......
-
Link's School of Business, Inc. v. Employment Sec. Agency
...Co., supra; Laub v. Meyer, Inc., 70 Idaho 224, 214 P.2d 884; Ohm v. J. R. Simplot Co., 70 Idaho 318, 216 P.2d 952; Nixon v. Webber-Riley Lumber Co., 71 Idaho 238, 229 P.2d 997; Blue Bell Co. v. Employment Security Agency, 75 Idaho 279, 270 P.2d 1054; Merrill v. Duffy Reed Construction Co., ......
-
Beutler v. MacGregor Triangle Co.
...determinable amount' of logs and that the Company had no right, at its will and pleasure, to discharge Scott. In Nixon v. Webber-Riley Lumber Co., 71 Idaho 238, 229 P.2d 997, in upholding the Board's determination that Nixon was an employee and not an independent contractor, this Court poin......