1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Wis.2d
  4. 22 Wis.2d
  5. 22 Wis.2d 674 (1964)
 

DAVIS v. INDUSTRIAL COMM.

22 Wis.2d 674 (1964)

DAVIS, Respondent, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION and others, Appellants.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

March 3, 1964.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellant Industrial Commission the cause was argued by Beatrice Lampert, assistant attorney general, with whom on the briefs was George Thompson, attorney general.

For the appellants Decar Plastic Corporation and Zurich Insurance Company there was a brief by Schlottauer, Jenswold, Reed & Studt and Robert R. Studt, all of Madison, and oral argument by John F. Jenswold.

For the respondent there was a brief by Lawton & Cates and John C. Carlson, all of Madison, and oral argument by Mr. Carlson.

BEILFUSS, J.

The trial court's memorandum opinion states in part as follows:

"Plaintiff reasons that under the `current' compensation law he is entitled to recovery. His contention is that Meade vs. Wisconsin Motor Mfg. Co. (1918 168 Wis. 250, 251; and McCarthy vs. Sawyer-Goodman Co. (1927) 194 Wis. 198, 203, are no longer the law in Wisconsin, specifically because pre-existing weakness or disposition to injury is no `bar' to recovery...

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