Legal Opinion

Malleable Iron Range Co. v. Industrial Commission

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1934PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

The employee was afflicted with arteriosclerosis in an advanced degree. This, of course, rendered him liable to just such a result as did occur. There is testimony describing the load which Grant was drawing, and characterizing the work of drawing such a load up that particular grade as hard work. To a man in the condition Grant was in, the risk of serious illness or death was increased by unusual exertion. Medical testimony was given to the effect that increased exertion, increased the hazard of a rupture.

The evidence leaves no room for doubt that the artery was extremely brittle and the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Vennen v. New Dells Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Bystrom Bros. v. JacobsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  2. M. & M. Realty Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Schmitt v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Andrzeczak v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Wisconsin Appleton Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955

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

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

Powered by the Exa API