Washington Recorder Pub. Co. v. Ernst
Decision Date | 24 May 1939 |
Docket Number | 27293. |
Parties | WASHINGTON RECORDER PUB. CO. v. ERNST, Director of Department of Social Security, et al. |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Thurston County; John M. Wilson, Judge.
Action by the Washington Recorder Publishing Company against Charles F. Ernst, Director of the Department of Social Security, and others for a declaratory judgment and to the application of the Unemployment Compensation Act to newspaper carriers delivering on routes for plaintiff. From a judgment declaring such carriers independent contractors, not within scope of such act, defendants appeal.
Modified in part and otherwise affirmed.
G.W Hamilton and Lyle L. Iversen, both of Olympia, for appellants.
Neal Brodie & Trullinger, of Olympia, for respondent.
Houghton Cluck & Coughlin, Evans, McLaren & Littell, Allen, Froude & Hilen, Todd, Holman & Sprague, Tanner & Garvin, and Bayley & Croson, all of Seattle, amici curiae.
The Washington Recorder Publishing Company publishes, in Olympia, a daily newspaper entitled the "Daily Olympian" which the publishing company distributes in Olympia and vicinity by approximately thirty-nine carriers, each of whom operates under a written contract between the carrier and the publishing company, which contract is in the form designated as "The Little Merchant Plan". The contract which is used by the publishing company with its carriers reads as follows:
The publishing company also publishes a special advertising paper, called the "Advertiser", once each week which is distributed to all homes in Olympia. The carriers of the publishing company are offered the right to distribute that paper within their respective routes, but are not required to do so; and if they refuse to make the distribution, the distribution is made by others. The distribution of the Advertiser is independent of the distribution of the Daily Olympian and is entirely independent of the work performed by the carriers under their contract. If the boys deliver the Advertiser they are paid from fifty cents to one dollar a week for such service. No charge is made to the recipients of the Advertiser. No control is exercised by the publishing company over the manner of delivery of the Advertiser other than to designate the area within which each boy is to make deliveries and the time by which deliveries are to be started.
Under the contract between the publishing company and its carriers for distribution of the Daily Olympian, the carriers purchase the papers from the publishing company at an agreed rate per week per paper and pay therefor weekly. The carriers sell the papers to their customers in the route or territory designated and at the price stipulated in the contract. The money received from the sale of the papers by the carriers belongs to the carriers who are not required to report to the publishing company the receipts from such sales. If the carriers fail to make collection the loss falls upon the carriers and not upon the publishing company. No control is exercised by the publishing company over the time and manner of the distribution of the Daily Olympian by the carriers except that the distribution must be made in accordance with the contract and no control is exercised over the time and method of collections. While there are numerous details of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Seattle Aerie No. 1 of Fraternal Order of Eagles v. Commissioner of Unemployment Compensation and Placement
...§ 9998-119(g)(5) (P. C. § 6233-317,) which provides * * *. (Italics ours.) 'This case was decided Nov. 24, 1942. It distinguishes the Recorder case, supra, and refers to Sound Cities Gas & Co. v. Ryan, supra, and Mulhausen v. Bates, supra. 'As applied to the instant case, the first question......
-
Henry Broderick, Inc. v. Riley, 29431.
...another under the unemployment compensation act. In Mulhausen v. Bates, 9 Wash.2d 264 at page 275, 114 P.2d 995, we distinguished the Recorder case, supra, apparently this distinction has been accepted in the cases subsequently decided, and as a result the decision in the Recorder case ha......
-
Meyer & Company v. Unemployment Comp. Comm.
...of Utah, 104 Pac. (2d) 201; Wisconsin Bridge & Iron Co. v. Ramsay, 233 Wis. 467, 290 N.W. 199; Washington Recorder Pub. Co. v. Ernst, 199 Wash. 176, 91 Pac. (2d) 718; Vert v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 342 Mo. 629, 117 S.W. (2d) 252. (3) Appellant contends that under the evidence, which shows conc......
-
Singer Sewing Mach. Co. v. State Unemployment Compensation Commission
... ... overruled ... The two ... Washington cases cited in the opinion disclose an unsettled ... state of the ... the state of Washington was not settled by the Recorder case, ... infra ... [116 P.2d 751.] ... In ... Washington Recorder Publishing Co. v. Ernst, 199 ... Wash. 176, 91 P.2d 716, 124 A.L.R. 667; Wisconsin Bridge ... ...