Manitowoc Public Schools Self-Insured v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentWilliam A. Bablitch, J.
¶ 58. (dissen-, ting). The majority holding in this case, authored by Chief Justice Abrahamson, is that the Finnegans' claim does not fit within the third factor in Bowen. I disagree and will address this issue first. The lead opinion, authored by Justice Sykes, concludes that the Finne-gans' claim is not permissible under chapter 655 because it is not derivative. I disagree and will address this issue second.
I
¶ 59. The majority holding, which concludes that Bowen does not permit recovery in this case, is simply wrong. The majority holding does not, because it cannot, articulate a principled…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bowen v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1994
- Shockley Ex Rel. Shockley v. PrierWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Fitzgerald v. Meissner & Hicks, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Giese v. Montgomery Ward, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- White v. LunderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.