Kimlark Rug Corp. v. Industrial Commission
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
There was no wage loss or disability while Stansfield continued working for appellant, nor for some time thereafter. The next working day after he severed this connection he engaged in work for another employer where he continued for several months. ■ There is no question but that the dermatitis, from which respondent was suffering *321at the time of the hearing before the Industrial Commission, resulted from exposure while in the employ of appellant. But because no loss of time or wages occurred while the relation of employer and employee existed between appellant and Stansfield, the workmen’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- Employers Mutual Liability Insurance v. McCormickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
- Wisconsin Granite Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Outboard Motor Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
- Falk Corp. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- North End Foundry Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- Renfro v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1939
- Michigan Quartz Silica Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
- Kannenberg Granite Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933