Taylor v. Eastern Connection Operating, Inc.

465 Mass. 191 (2013)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Taylor v. Eastern Connection Operating, Inc.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
465 Mass. 191 (2013)

Facts

Judith Ann Taylor, Gardner Taylor, and Donald Wellington (collectively, the couriers) (plaintiffs) were New York residents who worked as couriers for Eastern Connection Operating, Inc. (Eastern) (defendant), which was headquartered in Massachusetts. The couriers were under contract with Eastern to provide package-pickup and package-delivery services exclusively in New York. The contract, which contained a Massachusetts choice-of-law clause, provided that the couriers were independent contractors rather than employees. The couriers filed an action against Eastern in Massachusetts state court, claiming that Eastern had misclassified them as independent contractors. Eastern argued that New York law applied, and the couriers did not qualify as employees under New York’s narrower definition of employee. The trial court agreed and dismissed the couriers’ complaint. The couriers appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Lenk, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership