I.   Facts - What happened?

II.  Issue - What is the question of law? (one simple sentence) All the information you want to put here usually belongs under defense.

III. Holding - What is your decision?

IV. Reasoning - What principles of law did you base your decision on?

Case Three –

Employment Relationships. William Moore owned and operated Moore Enterprises, a wholesale tire business, in Idaho. While in high school, Williams son, Jonathan, worked as a Moore employee. Later, Jonathan started his own business, called Morecedes Tire. Morecedes regrooved tires and sold them to businesses, including Moore. Moore made payments for the tires not to Jonathan, but to Morecedes Tire, without tax withholding. A decade after Jonathan started Morecedes, William offered him work with Moore for $12 per hour.

Jonathan accepted but retained Morecedes Tire. On the first day, William told Jonathan to load some tires on a trailer. While Jonathan was unhooking the trailer, a jack handle struck him. He suffered several broken bones in his face and a detached retina. He was never paid for the work. He filed a workers' compensation claim. Under Idaho’s laws, an individual must be an employee-not an independent contractor-to obtain workers' compensation. What criteria do the courts use to determine employee status? How do they apply to Jonathan?

Discuss. [Moore v. Moore, P.3d (Idaho 20ll)]