Summary
finding control when company proscribed sales techniques and terminated sales persons who failed to make minimums
Summary of this case from Walfish v. Nw. Mut. Life Ins. Co.Opinion
Argued February 8, 1941 —
Decided May 1, 1941.
On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 124 N.J.L. 487.
For the respondents, Charles A. Malloy ( Herman D. Ringle, of counsel).
For the appellant, John A. Laird.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Brogan in the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, PARKER, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, PERSKIE, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, THOMPSON, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.