Garchek v. Norton Co.

The issue before this court is whether the trial court erred in failing to grant appellants summary judgment in that the exclusive remedy provision of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, sec. 102.08 (2), Stats., bars this action against the appellants because of their status as corporate officers.

Appellants do not challenge the proposition that an action may be maintained against a “coemployee” as a “third party” pursuant to sec. 102.29 (1), Stats. Appellants maintain, however, that a corporate officer should be a beneficiary of the exclusive remedy provision in a situation where such…