Court Opinion

ID: 9830084
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:51:37.093952+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:12.313364
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In response to appellant’s request for supplemental findings, we make the following additional findings of fact:
We find H. F. Curry loaded gravel for ap-pellee practically all the time under a written contract. For a few days, between the time of. the expiration of one contract and the receipt of another, he had no written contract, but continued’ to work under the same terms as the preceding written contract. Curry was to load the cars from the traps constructed by the railroad. That was a part of the consideration. Appellee furnished a box car for Curry’s employes to live in while engaged in said work. H. F. Curry made a written report of R. H. Ray’s injury to the roadmas-ter of appellee. The co'ntraet between appel-lee and H. F. Curry could be terminated on five days’ notice by appellee. A part of the time Cim-y was loading said gravel appellee furnished. him free transportation over its road and a part of the time he paid his way.
Having made the above additional findings as requested by appellant, we hereby overrule his motion for rehearing.