From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marcus v. Eastern Agricultural Ass'n, Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jun 6, 1960
32 N.J. 460 (N.J. 1960)

Summary

adopting the reasoning of Judge Conford

Summary of this case from Slater v. Skyhawk Transportation, Inc.

Opinion

Argued May 23, 1960 —

Decided June 6, 1960.

On appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Mr. William E. O'Connor, Jr., argued the cause for the appellant ( Mr. Henry L. Gertner, attorney).

Mr. Brian D. Conlan argued the cause for the respondent ( Messrs. Gurry and Conlan, attorneys).


The judgment is reversed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Conford in the court below.

Mr. Justice HALL votes to affirm the judgment for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of Judge Mintz.

For reversal — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, and Justices BURLING, JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR and SCHETTINO — 6.

For affirmance — Justice HALL — 1.


Summaries of

Marcus v. Eastern Agricultural Ass'n, Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jun 6, 1960
32 N.J. 460 (N.J. 1960)

adopting the reasoning of Judge Conford

Summary of this case from Slater v. Skyhawk Transportation, Inc.

adopting dissenting opinion

Summary of this case from Rutherford v. Modern Transp. Co.

In Marcus, 161 A.2d at 247 (per curiam), in 1960, a divided Supreme Court of New Jersey, in a one-sentence per curiam opinion, stated that "[t]he judgment is reversed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Conford in the court below."

Summary of this case from Tyson Farms, Inc. v. Uninsured Emp'rs' Fund

In Marcus, appellant, an experienced chicken farmer, raised eggs for appellee, a company in the business of "producing and selling eggs, and in raising laying chickens."

Summary of this case from Uninsured Emp'rs' Fund v. Tyson Farms, Inc.
Case details for

Marcus v. Eastern Agricultural Ass'n, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MURRAY MARCUS, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. EASTERN AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Jun 6, 1960

Citations

32 N.J. 460 (N.J. 1960)
161 A.2d 247

Citing Cases

Smith v. E.T.L. Enterprises

The term "employee" should be given neither a mechanical nor overly restrictive interpretation. Marcus v.…

Rossnagle v. Capra and Shell Oil Co.

If such is found then the court will determine that an employment relationship existed. See the dissenting…