CLARENCE F. BIRDSEYE, APPELLANT,

v.

ARTHUR WOODS, POLICE COMMISSIONER OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK; AND KELLOGG BIRDSEYE, APPELLANT, V. ARTHUR WOODS, POLICE COMMISSIONER OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK

Citator

Cited By

• Indus. Accident Comm'n of the State of Cal. v. Davis, 259 U.S. 182 (U.S. 1922)
  …ourt seems to have been of the view, and, indeed, expressed it, referring to the Law Case, that the test of the work was the instrument upon which it was performed, not the time of withdrawal of the instrument from use. This court reversed the case. 246 U. S. 657. There are other federal cases in which the decisions are diverse.1 And there are state cases of which the same comment may be made. [*187] We refrain from a review of our cases. They pronounce a test and illustrate it. We are called upon to apply…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Connolly et ux. v. Chicago (W.D. Wash. 1925)
  …130, 64 L. Ed. 258, 10 A. L. R. 1181. “It was not interrupted in an interstate haul, to be-repaired and go on.” M. & S. L. R. R. Co. v. Winters, 242 U. S. 353, 37 S. Ct. 170, 61 L. Ed. 358, Ann. Cas. 1918B, 54; C., K. & S. Ry. Co. v. Kindlesparker, 246 U. S. 657, 38 S. Ct. 425, 62 L. Ed. 925. In the Industrial Commission Case, supra, the court at page 184 (42 S. Ct. 490) said: “ * * * The engine was sent from exclusive employment in interstate commerce to the repair shops. It was sent there for general ove…

Authorities Cited

• Munsey v. Clough, 196 U.S. 364 (U.S. 1905)
• Pierce v. Creecy, 210 U.S. 387 (U.S. 1908)
• Drew v. Thaw, 235 U.S. 432 (U.S. 1914)