Legal Opinion

Mulder v. Acme-Cleveland Corp.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1980No. 77-432PublishedCited by 110 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

This third party action had its origin in a worker’s compensation claim which arose out of an injury to Leo Mulder while he was in the course of his employment at the Kohler Company. Compensation payments were made by the Kohler Company. Subsequently Leo Mulder and his wife brought a third party action against Acme-Cleveland Corporation and General Electric Company alleging that Leo Mulder’s injuries were the result of the negligence of Acme-Cleve land in designing and manufacturing a molding machine and that General Electric was negligent in respect to the design and manufacture of a…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Borgnis v. Falk Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Bielski v. SchulzeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  3. State Ex Rel. Hammermill Paper Co. v. La PlanteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Lambertson v. Cincinnati Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  5. Kallas Millwork Corp. v. Square D Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975

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

3Cited by110 opinions

  1. Correia v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  2. Aicher Ex Rel. LaBarge v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation FundWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State v. McManusWisconsin Supreme Court · 1989
  4. County of Dane v. Labor & Industry Review CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Thomas Ex Rel. Gramling v. MallettWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005

105 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