Legal Opinion

Town of Germantown v. Industrial Commission

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 8, 1922PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCrowNHArt, J.

This court has many times held that the compensation act is to be liberally construed to carry out its manifest purpose. That purpose is to relieve workmen from the distress of work accidents by placing a portion of the burden upon the employers, and through such employers, in the cost of production, upon the people as a whole. In passing this act the legislature made it elective as to private employers, but, having in mind that the state and municipalities should sét a good example, made the law mandatory as to them.

In this case we have a workman working for the town on its highways to pay…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In re AshbySupreme Court of Kansas · 1898
  2. City of Winfield v. PeedenCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1899

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. McLaughlin v. Antrim County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Murphy Supply Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Hendershot v. City of LincolnNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
  4. In Re KrothSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1965
  5. Scott v. City of HobbsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1961

3 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