Legal Opinion

Bitker Cloak & Suit Co. v. Industrial Commission

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 12, 1942PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWickhem, J.

The appellants contend that upon the undisputed evidence Miss Miller was not at the time of the accident performing services growing out of and incidental to her employment. Respondents contend that the question is whether the evidence sustains the commission’s findings that at the time of the injury Miss Miller was performing services growing out of and incidental to her employment.

The evidence, which is not in dispute, may briefly be stated. Miss Miller was a saleslady at the Bitker store. Her duties required her occasionally to call upon customers and make collections. On December 16,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Barragar v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  2. United States Casualty Co. v. Superior Hardware Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Kerin v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Ohrmund v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Githens v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Fruit Boat Market v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Black River Dairy Products, Inc. v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Makal v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  4. McRae v. Porta Painting, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2009
  5. Eckhardt v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API