1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Wis.2d
  4. 18 Wis.2d
  5. 18 Wis.2d 436 (1963)
 

HARRY CROW & SON, INC., v. INDUSTRIAL COMM.

18 Wis.2d 436 (1963)

HARRY CROW & SON, INC., and another, Appellants, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION and others, Respondents.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

January 8, 1963.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellants there was a brief by Kluwin, Dunphy, Hankin & Hayes of Milwaukee, and oral argument by John A. Kluwin.

For the respondent Industrial Commission the cause was argued by Beatrice Lampert, assistant attorney general, with whom on the brief was John W. Reynolds, attorney general.

WILKIE, J.

The sole issue to be determined on this appeal is whether Norbert Crow was, as the Industrial Commission expressly found, an employee under sec. 102.07 (4), Stats.,1 of Harry Crow & Son, Inc., at the time of the accident.

Although we have held that the ultimate determination of employer-employee relationship under the Wisconsin Workmen's Compensation Act is a question of...

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