Legal Opinion

Schmidlkofer v. Industrial Commission

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1953PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

It may be conceded as fundamental that where only one inference can reasonably be drawn from undisputed facts a question of law arises under the statute. However, it is true that even “if there is no dispute in the testimony a question of fact is presented if different inferences may be drawn, or ‘if something more than the application of a rule of law is required in order to reach a final conclusion.’ ” Hipke v. Industrial Comm. 261 Wis. 226, 231, 52 N. W. (2d) 401; Gant v. Industrial Comm. 263 Wis. 64, 56 N. W. (2d) 525. The commission found that the appellant, as well as the other members…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bartels v. BirminghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Gant v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Montello Granite Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Hipke v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Nestle's Food Co. v. Industrial Commission of WisconsinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Pabst v. Department of TaxationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Scholz v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Van Roy v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Larson v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Neese v. State Medical Society of WisconsinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967

22 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