Henry v. Mondillo

Superior Court of Rhode Island

Henry v. Mondillo

4 R.I. Dec. 40

Superior Court of Rhode Island·Decided November 5, 1927·No. W.C.A. Pet. No 752·Published

Opinion

Tanner, P. J.

The defence in this case was that the man injured was not an employee. He was a bricklayer by trade and was in the habit of agreeing to build catch basins for the defendant, who was a sewer contractor, whenever the contractor desired such catch basins built. He built these catch basins from time to time at a fixed price for the catch basin and without any apparent control upon the part of the contractor.

For petitioner: F. J. McOsker. For respondent: R. T. Bamefield.

We therefore think that he was not an employee and the petition is denied.

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

Tanner, P. J.

The defence in this case was that the man injured was not an employee. He was a bricklayer by trade and was in the habit of agreeing to build catch basins for the defendant, who was a sewer contractor, whenever the contractor desired such catch basins built. He built these catch basins from time to time at a fixed price for the catch basin and without any apparent control upon the part of the contractor.

For petitioner: F. J. McOsker. For respondent: R. T. Bamefield.

We therefore think that he was not an employee and the petition is denied.

Henry v. Mondillo, 4 R.I. Dec. 40 (R.I. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

4 R.I. Dec. 40 (Henry v. Mondillo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.