HALE v. KENDRICK

36496.

95 Ga. App. 348 (1957)

98 S.E.2d 65

HALE v. KENDRICK et al.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Rehearing Denied March 20, 1957.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Ben F. Sweet, for plaintiff in error.

Harry E. Monroe, Hubert C. Morgan, Walter P. McCurdy, contra.


FELTON, C. J.

The question for decision is whether the employer had "regularly in service" ten or more employees which would bring him within the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. The claimant sought to prove by his testimony that the employer did employ ten or more men. The employer testified that in his plastering business he needed only seven or eight men to conduct his work and that he had never employed ten or more men at any one time. The fact that...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases