Legal Opinion

Peronto v. Case Corp.

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided January 26, 2005No. 04-0846PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ANDERSON, PJ.

¶ 1. The sole issue in this case is whether Wis. Stat. § 102.29(6) (2003-04) 1 bars Jacquelyn and Daniel Peronto from recovering damages in this negligence action against Case Corporation because Jacquelyn was an employee of a "temporary help agency" at the time of her accident. We hold that Jacquelyn's employer, Compass Group USA, Inc., did not place her with Case, Case did not control her work activities and Case did not compensate Compass for Jacquelyn's services. Accordingly, we hold that Jacquelyn was not employed by a "temporary help agency" and § 102.29(6) does not…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. FranklinWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Nelson v. RotheringWisconsin Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Mullen v. WalczakWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Gansch v. Nekoosa Papers, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Kaelber Plumbing & Heating & Sentry Insurance v. Labor & Industry Review CommissionCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. M. M. Schranz Roofing, Inc. v. First Choice TemporaryCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API