CARPET MILL & LIGHTHOUSE v. EMPLOYMENT DIV.

No. 79-T-102; CA A21041.

642 P.2d 354 (1982)

56 Or.App. 552

The CARPET MILL & LIGHTHOUSE George R. Smith, Dba, Petitioner, v. EMPLOYMENT DIVISION OF THE STATE OF OREGON, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Argued and Submitted October 26, 1981.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jeffery D. Herman, Springfield, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Wiswall, Svoboda, Thorp & Dennett, P.C., Springfield.

William F. Gary, Sol. Gen., Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., and Rudolph S. Westerband, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem.

Before GILLETTE, P.J., YOUNG, J., and ROBERTS, J. Pro Tem.


YOUNG, Judge.

Petitioner appeals from a referee's decision ruling that 14 persons who installed carpet and other products for petitioner were employes, rather than independent contractors, and that petitioner was therefore liable for unemployment compensation tax payments for the period in question, April 1, 1978, through June 30, 1979. We remand for further proceedings.

The distinction between an employe and independent contractor, for these purposes, is...

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