PAYKEL v. ROSE


265 Wis. 471 (1953)

PAYKEL and another, Respondents, vs. ROSE, Defendant: LUICK DAIRY COMPANY, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

December 30, 1953.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellant there was a brief by Zimmers, Randall & Zimmers, attorneys, and Bruce B. F. Randolph of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Wilke M. Zimmers.

For the respondents there was a brief and oral argument by Jack A. Berland of Milwaukee.


FRITZ, C. J.

Luick contends that neither a violation of the safe-place statute nor of any of the rules pertaining to common-law negligence is pleaded.

To entitle plaintiffs to recover for violation of the safeplace statute plaintiffs must plead and establish that the place at which Mrs. Paykel was injured was a "place of employment" as that terms is defined in sec. 101.01 (1), Stats., the provisions of which are as follows:

"The phrase `place of employment...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases