Legal Opinion
Bergner v. Industrial Commission
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided January 30, 1968PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRobert W. Hansen, J.
The sole question in this case is: At the time of the fatal injury, was the deceased performing services growing out of and incidental to his employment ?
Answering that question begins with the statutory provision under which the application for death benefits was brought. Sec. 102.03 (1), Stats., provides:
“Liability under this chapter shall exist against an employer only where the following conditions concur:
“ (c) 1. Where, at the time of the injury, the employee is performing service growing out of and incidental to his employment. . . .
“ (f) Every employee whose employment requires him to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Fitz v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Schmiedeke v. Four Wheel Drive Auto Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
- Van Valin v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Employers Mutual Liability Insurance v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
- Racine County v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dibble v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Wisconsin Electric Power Co. v. Labor & Industry Review CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
- City of Santa Fe v. HernandezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
- Village of Hilbert v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- City of Santa Fe v. HernandezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982