Court Opinion

ID: 9527776
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:34:08.610125+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:26:11.964720
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
(concurring). I concur in the result. I do not, however, join the majority opinion.
I cannot join the court’s discussion of what constitutes “course of business” and “rented or leased,” because it is unnecessarily broad. I object to the dicta (p. 532) intimating that sec. 893.80(3), which limits municipal liability ($25,000, then; $50,000 now), applies (or conversely that sec. 345.05(2), removing those limits, does not apply) to injuries caused by the negligent operation of a car by a municipal employee who receives reimbursement for the use of her or his own car and is transporting herself or himself from one place to another in the course of duties for the municipality. Any decision regarding specific factual situations should not be made until those facts are squarely before the court.