holding that the nurse who administered the vaccination “was not employed from altruistic motives or for the benefit of mankind in general, but because ... the service rendered ... were a direct benefit to her employer”
How later courts described this case
- holding that the nurse who administered the vaccination “was not employed from altruistic motives or for the benefit of mankind in general, but because ... the service rendered ... were a direct benefit to her employer”
- infection resulting from hyperdermic injection
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DREW, J.,
concurs in the decree of the court, but does not agree with the holding of the court in the case of Jackson v. Travelers’ Ins. Co., which is cited herein.