Dustrude Case

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Dustrude Case

182 N.E.2d 487, 344 Mass. 752, 1962 Mass. LEXIS 900

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 2, 1962·Published

Opinion

Decree affirmed. The Industrial Accident Board found (a) that the claimant, Dustrude, the operator of a tractor-drawn trailer, was an employee of the uninsured “owner-operator,” Leighton; and (b) that Leighton was, as to the insured carrier and trailer owner, Chicago Express, Inc., an independent contractor under a “trip lease” arrangement. See American Trucking Assns. Inc. v. United States, 344 U. S. 298, 302-306. The findings were not without evidential support and were not tainted by error of law. Van Bibber’s Case, 343 Mass. 443, 447. They are determinative of the ease. Costs of this appeal may be allowed by the single justice under G. L. c. 152, § 11A.

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

Decree affirmed. The Industrial Accident Board found (a) that the claimant, Dustrude, the operator of a tractor-drawn trailer, was an employee of the uninsured “owner-operator,” Leighton; and (b) that Leighton was, as to the insured carrier and trailer owner, Chicago Express, Inc., an independent contractor under a “trip lease” arrangement. See American Trucking Assns. Inc. v. United States, 344 U. S. 298, 302-306. The findings were not without evidential support and were not tainted by error of law. Van Bibber’s Case, 343 Mass. 443, 447. They are determinative of the ease. Costs of this appeal may be allowed by the single justice under G. L. c. 152, § 11A.

Dustrude Case, 182 N.E.2d 487, 344 Mass. 752, 1962 Mass. LEXIS 900 (Mass. 1962).

Pincite

182 N.E.2d 487 (Dustrude Case) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related