Home/Idaho Supreme Court/Arbogast v. Jerome Cooperative Creamery

Arbogast v. Jerome Cooperative Creamery

149 P.2d 230, 65 Idaho 556, 1944 Ida. LEXIS 81
CourtIdaho Supreme Court
DecidedMay 9, 1944
DocketNo. 7176.
StatusPublished

This text of 149 P.2d 230 (Arbogast v. Jerome Cooperative Creamery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arbogast v. Jerome Cooperative Creamery, 149 P.2d 230, 65 Idaho 556, 1944 Ida. LEXIS 81 (Idaho 1944).

Opinions

*558 GIVENS, J.

Appellant Jerome Cooperative Creamery was a manufacturer of casein at Burley. Trays for drying the casein were part of its necessary equipment. These trays were made of wood and screen material on which the casein was placed and dried. The company employed Theodore Arbogast and his brother, claimant, to manufacture these trays, for which they were to receive 50c a tray and $1.00 an hour for sawing the w;ood to the proper dimensions. The work was to be done on Theodore Arbogast’s premises and on the premises of the two lumber companies where the lumber was secured and sawed by the Arbogasts with the equipment of the lumber companies. Claimant, while ripping the wood, suffered a severe injury to his hand, for which he asks compensation from the company and the fund as its insurance carrier. The claim is resisted on the ground that the claimant was an outworker or a casual employee. The board found he was neither and awarded compensation.

While these trays were a necessary part of the company’s equipment and undoubtedly had to be made or purchased from time to time as they might wear out or new equipment was needed, there was no evidence to show that it was the regular or periodical custom of the company to employ workmen to make these trays. It is not shown that it is essentially a part of the creamery company’s business in the manufacture of casein to employ workmen to make these trays. Making of the trays was as to the company only casual and falls within the application of the rule announced in Orr v. Boise Cold Storage Co., 52 Ida. 151, 12 P. (2d) 270; Rabideau v. Cramer, 59 Ida. 154, 81 P. (2d) 403; Dawson v. Joe Chester Artificial Limb Co., 62 Ida. 508, 112 P. (2d) 494; Ross v. Reynolds, 64 Ida. 87, 127 P. (2d) 775; Bigley v. Smith, 64 Ida. 185, 129 P. (2d) 658.

*559 This conclusion renders it unnecessary to consider whether claimant was also an outworker. .

The order of the board is reversed.

Ailshie, J., concurs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Carlson v. F. H. DeAtley & Co.
46 P.2d 1089 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1935)
Liberg v. Genessee Union Warehouse Co.
38 P.2d 999 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1934)
Ross v. Reynolds
127 P.2d 775 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1942)
Dawson v. Joe Chester Artificial Limb Co.
112 P.2d 494 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1941)
Bigley v. Smite
129 P.2d 658 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1942)
Suren v. Sunshine Mining Co.
70 P.2d 399 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1937)
Webb v. Gem State Oil Co.
55 P.2d 1302 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1936)
Orr v. Boise Cold Storage Co.
12 P.2d 270 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1932)
Rabideau v. Cramer
81 P.2d 403 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1938)
Vaughn v. Robertson & Thomas
29 P.2d 756 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1934)
Nistad v. Winton Lumber Co.
85 P.2d 236 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1938)
Parkison v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.
57 P.2d 1216 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1936)
Rand v. Lafferty Transportation Co.
92 P.2d 786 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1939)
Wells v. Robinson Construction Co.
16 P.2d 1059 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1932)
Cassedy Funeral Home ex rel. Parsons v. Tesemini Timber Protective Ass'n
84 P.2d 566 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1938)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
149 P.2d 230, 65 Idaho 556, 1944 Ida. LEXIS 81, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arbogast-v-jerome-cooperative-creamery-idaho-1944.