Schuh v. Industrial Commission
| Decision Date | 07 January 1958 |
| Citation | 2 Wis.2d 611,87 N.W.2d 256 |
| Parties | Raymond J. SCHUH, Appellant, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION and Armour & Co. et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Ernest T. C. Hanson, Eau Claire, for appellant.
Toebaas, Hart, Kraege & Jackman, Madison, for Armour & Co.
Stewart G. Honeck, Atty. Gen., and Mortimer Levitan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for Industrial Commission.
Plaintiff brought a claim before the Industrial Commission for workmen's compensation which he alleged to be due him on the theory that his injury and disability, a slipped disc in his spine, arose out of and in the course of his employment. The Industrial Commission conducted a hearing after which it made the following findings:
'That applicant alleges injury to his cervical disc when he rolled his shoulders in the course of a routine physical examination at the request of the respondent; that applicant had previous complaints of stiffness in the neck and shoulders; that the circumstances at the time when applicant alleges injury did not constitute an accident within the meaning of the provisions of the act; that applicant did not sustain injury arising out of his employment with the respondent.'
The commission, by order, dismissed the application. The employee took an appeal to the circuit court, which affirmed the commission's action.
Appellant submits that sec. 102.18(1) of the workmen's compensation act requires the commission to make findings of fact and it has not done so in this proceeding; and that the commission's order denying compensation was based on erroneous conclusions of law.
The finding quoted above, 'that applicant did not sustain injury arising out of his employment with respondent' is a true finding of fact, not a conclusion of law.
A condition of the employer's liability to pay workmen's compensation to an injured employee is found in sec. 102.03(1)(e), Stats., as follows:
'Where the accident or disease causing injury arises out of his employment.'
The finding of fact that the applicant did not sustain injury arising out of his employment with respondent negatives the factual requirement imposed by the above statute. If there is any evidence to sustain that finding the commission and the circuit court must be affirmed.
The plaintiff attributes his disability to the actions of the company doctor. The doctor in conducting the annual physical examination of the employee directed him to roll his shoulders forward and backward. At that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R.T. Madden, Inc. v. Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations
...relied upon Lewellyn v. ILHR Dept. (1968), 38 Wis.2d 43, 155 N.W.2d 678, which approved the standard of Schuh v. Industrial Comm. (1958), 2 Wis.2d 611, 614, 87 N.W.2d 256, 258, that 'Findings of fact by the commission must stand in the reviewing courts if there is any credible evidence to s......
-
Fitz v. Industrial Commission
...Comm., 1958, 5 Wis.2d 570, 93 N.W.2d 329; Borden Co. v. Industrial Comm., 1958, 2 Wis.2d 619, 87 N.W.2d 261; Schuh v. Industrial Comm., 1958, 2 Wis.2d 611, 87 N.W.2d 256. The appellant first argues there is sufficient credible testimony to support his contention that the condition in his th......
-
Grant County Service Bureau, Inc. v. Industrial Commission
...129, 124 N.W.2d 112; Indianhead Truck Lines, Inc. v. Industrial Comm. (1962), 17 Wis.2d 562, 117 N.W.2d 679; Schuh v. Industrial Comm. (1958), 2 Wis.2d 611, 87 N.W.2d 256; Unruh .v. Industrial Comm. (1959), 8 Wis.2d 394, 99 N.W.2d 182; and (2) that the workmen's compensation statute must be......
-
Unruh v. Industrial Commission
...or permanent disability as a result of the accident, the finding of the Industrial Commission must be sustained. Schuh v. Industrial Comm., 1958, 2 Wis.2d 611, 87 N.W.2d 256; Borden Co. v. Industrial Comm., 1958, 2 Wis.2d 619, 87 N.W.2d The appellant had the burden of proving the temporary ......