Legal Opinion

Metropolitan Casualty Insurance v. Industrial Commission

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1951PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCureie, J.

Three questions are presented on this appeal: (1) Does the payment, by Metropolitan to applicant and the taking of the general release from him in 1928 constitute a “compromise” within the provisions of sec. 102.16 (1), Stats. 1927, so as to bar any further claim by applicant for such injury after the lapse of one year from November 12, 1928?(2) Does the six-year statute of limitations bar applicant’s claim?(3) Did the dissolution of the employer corporation, and the lapse of three years from the effective date thereof, abate applicant’s claim?

Sec. 102.16 (1), Stats. 1927, provided in part:

“An…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Thomas v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Federal Rubber Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Continental National Bank of Chicago v. McGeochWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
  4. State ex rel. Pabst v. Circuit Court for Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
  5. J. I. Case Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wisconsin Axle Division v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  2. C. F. Trantow Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Waunakee Canning Corp. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Security National Bank v. CohenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative CreamerySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970

2 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