Okla. Publ'g Co. v. Greenlee
| Decision Date | 02 June 1931 |
| Docket Number | Case Number: 21670 |
| Citation | 1931 OK 312,300 P. 684,150 Okla. 69 |
| Parties | OKLAHOMA PUBLISHING CO. et al. v. GREENLEE et al. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
¶0 1. Master and Servant--"Independent Contractor" Defined.
"An 'independent contractor' is one who engages to perform a certain service for another, according to his own manner and method, free from control and direction of his employer in all matters connected with the performance of the service, except as to the result or product of the work." Southern Construction Co. v. State Industrial Commission, 112 Okla. 248, 240 P. 613.
2. Same--Distributor of Newspapers Held not Within Provisions of Workmen's Compensation Law.
Where respondent enters into a contract with a publishing company to receive at a designated place each day newspapers published by said company and to carry and deliver the same, or cause the same to be done, to its subscribers, for which he received compensation therefor; and where he expressly agreed to do, or cause such work to be done, according to his own method in such conveyance or in such manner as he alone should determine at his own risk and expense, being responsible to the company only for the specified result, namely, safe carriage and delivery of said papers, held, that he was an independent contractor of said company and does not come within the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Law.
Original action by Oklahoma Publishing Company and insurance carrier to review award of State Industrial Commission to J. P. Greenlee. Award vacated and set aside.
H. C. Thurman and Byrne A. Bowman, for petitioners.
Charles L. Roff, Jr., Geo. C. Hill, and C. W. Van Eaton, for respondents.
¶1 This is a proceeding by petitioner, Oklahoma Publishing Company, and Union Indemnity Company, its insurance carrier, to review an award of the State Industrial Commission, made and entered on the 1st day of July, 1930.
¶2 On April 28, 1929, the respondent, J. P. Greenlee, received an injury to his right eye while delivering newspapers for the Oklahoma Publishing Company. The respondent quit work on May 4, 1929, and did not return to his work until December 5, 1929. At the time of his injury, his average daily wage was about $ 9 per day. The respondent had long prior to the receipt of this injury lost the use of his left eye by an accidental shot from a gun. The respondent on the 8th day of March, 1929, entered into a contract with the Oklahoma Publishing Company, which contract is as follows:
¶3 The respondent states the circumstances in reference to sustaining the injury to his right eye as follows:
"Well, I was delivering papers on the route and I stopped the car to pick up a bundle of papers and started across the road, and there come up a whirlwind and it blew something in my eye, and I couldn't finish my route."
¶4 There is no controversy in reference to the facts in this case. The gist of the action centers on the contract entered into between the Oklahoma Publishing Company and the respondent. The respondent in the performance of the work under the contract used his own automobile truck and hired two boys, who rode on the sides of the car and either delivered or threw the papers to the various subscribers of the Oklahoma Publishing Company. There was no route mapped out or designated for him to take, or as to how or where he should go. This was entirely left to respondent. Respondent was given a commission for what customers he could obtain and was allowed a commission of 19 3-4 cents on each paper each week to each customer in addition to the $ 25 per week. He paid the boys for their work in assisting him in delivering these papers. After the injury the respondent hired others to continue this work for him under the contract, and the respondent testified that he did not work around any of the machinery and did not work around the plant of the Oklahoma Publishing Company, but was engaged in the performance of the delivery of these papers under his contract. He commenced his work under the terms of the contract about October 1, 1928. Since December 5, 1929, said respondent engaged a portion of his time in driving a team and as a night watchman.
¶5 The petitioners contend that the Commission's finding that the respondent was in the employ of the Oklahoma Publishing Company on the date of his injury is not reasonably supported by any...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Atlas Life Ins. Co. of Tulsa v. Foraker
...the power to direct him in the manner in which the general objects of his services were to be obtained. ¶9 In Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. Greenlee, 150 Okla. 69, 300 P. 684, cited with approval in W. H. Butcher Packing Co. v. Hixon, supra, the contract between the parties provided that Green......
-
Taylor v. Langley, Case Number: 29115
...the work.' Southern Construction Co. et al. v. State Industrial Commission, 112 Okla. 248, 240 P. 613." (Oklahoma Publishing Co. et al. v. Greenlee et al., 150 Okla. 69, 300 P. 684.) 2. SAME--Recovery barred by relationship of principal and independent contractor created by contract. Where ......
-
Smittle v. Rutherford
...the State Industrial Commission was fully justified in finding that petitioner was an independent contractor. See Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. Greenlee, 150 Okla. 69, 300 P. 684; Getman-MacDonell-Summers Drug Co. v. Acosta, 162 Okla. 77, 19 P.2d 149; Southland Cotton Oil Co. v. Pritchett, 167......
-
Sawin v. Nease
...the result is achieved. This portion of the contract is in principle no different from the contract involved in Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. Greenlee, 150 Okla. 69, 300 P. 684, in which it was held that a trucker or deliveryman who agreed to receive newspapers from a publishing company each d......