Tyrrell v. Industrial Commission
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.
Is there any credible evidence or reasonable inference drawn therefrom to support the finding of the Industrial Commission that at the time of the accident the employee, Tyrrell, “had deviated for a personal purpose and had not returned to the normal route to be used in his work.” Under the familiar rule, if there is such evidence in the record the finding of the commission must be affirmed.
The statute involved is sec. 102.03 (1) (f), Stats., which provides:
“Every employe whose employment requires him to travel shall be deemed to be performing service growing out of and incidental to his…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Barragar v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
- Unruh v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Hansen v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1951
- Grant County Service Bureau, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
- Employers Mutual Liability Insurance v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Goranson v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- CBS, Inc. v. Labor & Industry Review CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1998
- Sauerwein v. Department of Industry & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- Lager v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Dibble v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.