Case ID: wis-2d_300/html/0133-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DaimlerChrysler c/o ESIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Labor and Industry Review Commission and Glenn May, Defendants-Respondents.
    Supreme Court
    
      No. 2005AP544.
    
    
      Decided March 30, 2007.
    
    2007 WI 40
    (Also reported in 729 N.W.2d 212.)
   PER CURIAM.

¶ 1. DaimlerChrysler moves the court to reconsider its opinion in DaimlerChrysler v. Labor & Industry Review Comm'n, 2007 WI 15, 299 Wis. 2d 1, 727 N.W.2d 311, on the ground that the court based its decision on a statute not in effect when the injury to Glenn May occurred.

¶ 2. The motion for reconsideration is denied.

¶ 3. However, to clarify the DaimlerChrysler opinion, we now add the following footnote at the end of the second sentence of ¶ 39:

17 Wisconsin Stat. § 102.32(6)(b) became effective March 30, 2004. Wis. Act 144. It was therefore not in effect at the time of May's accident. We draw on it here not as a statement of the law in 1999, but because it demonstrates that the LIRC's interpretation of § 102.18(l)(d) is reasonable.

¶ 4. Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration is denied, without costs.