Konick v. Berke, Moore Co. Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding employee was servant because he had been instructed to do particular job, notwithstanding that he had not been instructed on “manner” of driving
• defining right to control “manner and means” as right to control “details” of servant’s work
• parting with previous decisions such as Khoury v. Edison Elec. Illuminating Co., supra, which held master-servant relationship requires right to control “manner and means (the details, in other words)” of servant’s work
• satisfaction of both factors qualifies a person as a “public employee,” as “the law gives the master the right of direction and control”
• employee directed to go to home office to get the payroll

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).