Hoffer Bros. v. Smith

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that \[t]he test is the nature of the employment and not the nature of the contract\
• laborer employed as “extra” to handle furniture injured after only few hours of work held not to be casual employee but entitled to workers’ compensation because employment by retail furniture company was in usual course of employer’s trade, business, or occupation
• “The Virginia act being, practically speaking, a copy of the Indiana act, the judicial construction placed upon the latter act in that State will be considered to have been adopted along with the act in this State.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).