Phelps v. Physicians Insurance

¶ 68. (dissenting). Appellate standards of review defíne the roles of appellate courts and are often outcome determinative. Here, by applying an incorrect standard of review, the majority reaches an erroneous conclusion.

¶ 69. I write separately because (1) the majority fails to apply the correct appellate standard for review of a paper record; (2) it erroneously concludes that Dr. Lindemann was a borrowed employee; (3) unlike the majority, I conclude that Wis. Stat. ch. 655 does not bar Gregory Phelps' bystander claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Accordingly, I respectfully…