Court Opinion

ID: 9698291
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:46:43.371618+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:39.888852
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam
(on motion for rehearing). The opinion refers to sec. 270.58, Stats., as embodying “the long settled law . . . that public officers or employees may be proceeded against in their official capacities.” On rehearing, it has been called to our attention that the quoted portion of the statement could be construed as a rule of liability. It was not so intended; and were it given that blanket interpretation, it would be incorrect. Sec. 270.58 imposes an obligation on the state or municipality only if a judgment has been secured against the officer or employee. As stated in the opinion, the duty of the defendants herein was of a nondelegable, ministerial nature. These facts, if proved on trial, would impose liability not on the basis of sec. 270.58, but rather on the rationale of Meyer v. Carman (1955), 271 Wis. 329, 73 N. W. 2d 514.
Motion for rehearing denied without costs.