Court Opinion

ID: 9655035
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 18:58:32.677873+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:15.672658
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
(dissenting on motion for reconsideration). I dissent from the majority’s holding on reconsideration that the owner-operators are engaged in an independently established business, sec. 108.02(3) (b)2, Stats. 1979-80. This court has said that the test set forth in sec. 108.02(3) (b)2 presents a factual question for DILHR and that on review the court will look for credible and substantial evidence in the record to support the Department’s findings as to whether the employees in question are engaged in an independently established business. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. *289bILHR Department, 90 Wis. 2d 736, 744, 280 N.W.2d 240 (1979); Transport Oil, Inc. v. Cummings, 54 Wis. 2d 256, 267, 195 N.W.2d 649 (1972).
In this case DILHR has made no such findings. Star Line does not appear to have presented evidence specifically related to this issue nor to have addressed this issue at the proceedings before DILHR, the circuit court, the court of appeals, or this court. Nor did Star Line address the issue at oral argument before this court. DILHR first raised the issue in its motion for reconsideration, in response to the majority’s holding.
I dissent because I conclude that this court is acting as a fact-finder and as such has exceeded its appellate jurisdiction. I would remand the matter to DILHR.