Legal Opinion

SPRAGUE-DAWLEY, INC. v. Moore

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 1968PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

Sprague-Dawley bases its contention primarily upon the words of the pertinent statutory provisions. The statute, sec. 108.02 (5) (g) 1, Stats., exempts employment in “agricultural labor,” which is defined in sec. 108.02 (23) (a) and (e) as services performed :

“(a) On a farm, in connection with cultivating the soil, or in connection with raising or harvesting any agricultural or horticultural commodity, including the raising, shearing, feeding, caring for, training and management of live stock, bees, poultry, and fur-bearing animals and wildlife.”
“(e) As used in this subsection, the term…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Marathon Electric Manufacturing Corp. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Industrial Commission v. Woodlawn Cemetery Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Seley v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Redevelopment Authority of Green Bay v. Bee Frank, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Engineers & Scientists of Milwaukee, Inc. v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Starry v. Horace Mann Insurance Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1982
  4. State (Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin) v. City of MadisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970

4 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