Case Name: DaimlerChrysler c/o ESIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Labor and Industry Review Commission and Glenn May, Defendants-Respondents
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 2007-03-30
Citations: 300 Wis. 2d 133
Docket Number: No. 2005AP544
Parties: DaimlerChrysler c/o ESIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Labor and Industry Review Commission and Glenn May, Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports Second
Volume: 300
Pages: 133–134

Head Matter:
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.)

Opinion:
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.