Legal Opinion

Nelson v. Industrial Commission

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 5, 1935PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFritz, J.

The commission denied plaintiff’s application for compensation on the ground that his claim was barred by reason of the six-year statute of limitations, sec. 330.19, Stats., which in Federal Rubber Co. v. Industrial Comm. 185 Wis. 299, 201 N. W. 261, and in Acme Body Works v. Industrial Comm. 204 Wis. 493, 234 N. W. 756, 236 N. W. 378, was held applicable to claims under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

On August 12, 1925, plaintiff was injured when a metal chip struck his right eye while he was working for the H. & M. Body Corporation. He immediately went to the employer’s first-aid room and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Acme Body Works v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Miller v. LaingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
  3. Federal Rubber Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Griffin v. Rustless Iron & Steel Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1947
  2. A. D. Thomson Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Creamery Package Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Larson v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API