Legal Opinion
Beck v. Hamann
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided February 3, 1953PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
Sec. 102.03 (1), Stats., provides that liability under the Workmen’s Compensation Act shall exist against an employer only where the following conditions concur:
“(a) Where the employee sustains an injury.. “(b) Where, at the time of the injury, both the employer and employee are subject to the provisions of this chapter.
“(c) Where, at the tifhe of the injury, the employee is performing service growing out of and incidental to his employment. . . .
“(d) Where the injury is not intentionally self-inflicted.
“(e) Where the accident or disease causing injury arises out of his employment. ...”
Sub.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- New York Central Railroad Company v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Fahey v. MalloneeSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Borgnis v. Falk Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Anderson v. Miller Scrap Iron Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
- Boek v. Wong HingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- School District No. 1 v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Zabkowicz v. West Bend Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Cartwright v. SharpeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Jenson v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.