Boyle's Wisconsin Safe-Place Law



Chapter One: Nature of Safe-Place Law

    (j) Interstate Commerce Excluded
It has been held that the Wisconsin safe-place law does not apply to an interstate commerce situation in which the injured employee is subject to the Federal Compensation Act. [83] The case which so held involved injuries to a railway employee caused by the head of a hammer, being used by a fellow employee, becoming detached. In an earlier case involving injuries sustained while unloading lumber from a warehouse pile preparatory to interstate shipment, the court held "that work of preparing articles for interstate commerce is not a part of such commerce within the meaning of the federal Employers' Liability Act", and that the Wisconsin safe-place law had not been superseded. [84] A study of decisions applying the federal act would be in order whenever the interstate commerce element is presented.

Conversion Table Wis. 2d to N.W. 2d or N.W.

83. Kolasinski v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 164 Wis. 50, 52 (1916): "Counsel for appellant also invokes the safe-place doctrine under the state statute, but since the case is one falling under the federal act the statute is not applicable." The court also said [51]: "It is established by the verdict that the plaintify's husband was injured while in the employ of the defendant in interstate commerce."

84. Sullivan v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 163 Wis. 583, 587 (1916). See also Emberg v. Great Northern R. Co., 156 Wis. 396 (1914), where plaintiff switchman was injured by reason of location of switch stand. The trial court absolved the defendant of negligence and the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed, stating [399]: "Before taking up the trial of this case again it would be well for counsel to carefully read the decisions of the federal courts upon the scope and effect of the federal Employer's Liability Act, which seems to be covered by the complaint and to have been disregarded on the trial." The dissenting opinion in the Emberg case stated [405]: "It is very probable that under the facts shown in this case either party had the right to insist that the federal law was applicable to it. Neither party requested that it be tried under such law, and under the Leora [Leora v. Minneapolis, St. P. & S. S. M. R. Co., 156 Wis. 386 (1914)) and Hanson [Hanson v. 'Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 157 Wis. 455 (1914)] Cases, decided herewith, the right was waived as to the trial already had." In Van de Zande v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co., 168 Wis. 628 (1919), where a railroad employee was injured by jumping to the ground from the doorway of a box car in which he had been working unloading ties, the court sustained safe-place liability, pointing out [629]: "The plaintiff's employment at the time of the injury not being within the field of interstate commerce...."


Revised October 20, 2001

Top