Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

contractlawsuitdamagesliabilitytrial

contractliabilityappellantappellee

Related Cases

Murrell v. Goertz, 597 P.2d 1223, 1979 OK CIV APP 25

Facts

On August 27, 1976, Bruce Goertz, while making collections for the Daily Oklahoman, got into an argument with homeowner C. L. Murrell over damage to her screen door caused by the newspaper. The argument escalated, resulting in Murrell slapping Goertz, who then struck her back, leading to her injuries and subsequent medical treatment. Murrell filed a lawsuit seeking damages from both Goertz and the Oklahoma Publishing Company, claiming that Goertz was an employee of the company.

On August 27, 1976, Bruce Goertz was making monthly collections for the delivery of appellant's morning newspaper, the Daily Oklahoman, which is published by appellee. Appellant questioned Goertz concerning damage to appellant's screen door caused by the newspaper carrier throwing the newspaper into it. An argument ensued culminating in appellant slapping Goertz who in turn struck appellant. As a result thereof, appellant was allegedly injured, requiring medical treatment and subsequent hospitalization.

Issue

Was Bruce Goertz an employee of Oklahoma Publishing Company, making the company liable for the alleged assault and battery?

Rule

The distinction between an independent contractor and a servant is determined by the right to control the physical details of the work. An independent contractor operates free from the control and direction of the employer, except as to the result of the work.

The line of demarcation between an independent contractor and a servant is not clearly drawn. An independent contractor is one who engages to perform a certain service for another according to his own methods and manner, free from control and direction of his employer in all matters connected with the performance of the service except as to the result thereof.

Analysis

The court analyzed the relationship between Goertz and the publishing company, noting that Goertz was hired as an independent contractor by Russell Westbrook, who was also an independent contractor. The evidence indicated that the publishing company did not control Goertz's work or have any direct relationship with him, which supported the conclusion that Goertz was not an employee of the publishing company.

From a review of the record we conclude that the evidence is reasonably susceptible of but one inference. Bruce Goertz was hired as an independent carrier salesman by his friend Russell Westbrook, who was himself an independent contractor. Appellee had no input into the decision to hire Goertz and had no knowledge of his employment.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that Oklahoma Publishing Company was not liable for the actions of Bruce Goertz as he was an independent contractor.

AFFIRMED.

Who won?

Oklahoma Publishing Company prevailed because the court found that Goertz was not their employee, thus absolving them of liability for his actions.

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

Wegner v. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co., 479 N.W.2d 38, 60 USLW 2408, 23 A.L.R.5th 954

Zeier v. Zimmer, Inc., 152 P.3d 861, 2006 OK 98

Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66, 95 S.Ct. 2080, 45 L.Ed.2d 26

State, Dept. of Corrections v. Cowles, 151 P.3d 353

Campbell v. Weathers, 153 Kan. 316, 111 P.2d 72