Metro Taxi, Inc. v. Brackett

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing jury award for plaintiff when “there was no evidence that the [cab company] drivers were required ... to accept the [dispatcher’s] calls and provide taxi services to the callers”
• reversing jury award for plaintiff when \there was no evidence that the [cab company] drivers were required . . . to accept the [dispatcher's] calls and provide taxi services to the callers\
• no employer-employee relationship shown where driver had permit to drive taxi, driver’s only obligation was to pay daily fee to drive car, driver was not required to accept calls from company, and company exercised no control over where drivers operated

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).