Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment – workers’ compensation — exclusive remedy provision

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 8, 2014//

Employment – workers’ compensation — exclusive remedy provision

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 8, 2014//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Employment – workers’ compensation — exclusive remedy provision

Dean Hurt and Hurt’s Recycling, LLC (collectively, Hurt) appeal a summary judgment dismissing their negligence claims against Josh Cole, Joel Hegna, their businesses, and their insurers. The circuit court dismissed Hurt’s negligence claims after concluding the claims were barred by the Worker’s Compensation Act’s exclusive remedy provision, Wis. Stat. § 102.03(2). On appeal, Hurt argues § 102.03(2) cannot bar his claims because the exclusive remedy provision applies only when conditions exist for an employer’s liability and the conditions do not exist in this case. He also argues Cole and Hegna are not employees. We conclude the conditions for employer liability are satisfied and Cole and Hegna are employees. Accordingly, we conclude the negligence claims are barred because of Cole’s and Hegna’s co-employee immunity. We therefore affirm the grant of summary judgment. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2013AP2339 Hurt et al. v. Cole et al.

Dist III, Barron County, Bitney, J., Mangerson, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Sempf, Timothy T., Amery; Whitley, Jason W., Amery; For Respondent: Pelish, James A., Rice Lake; Thrasher, Joe, Rice Lake

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests