193 Wis. 38 | Wis. | 1927
Action to set aside an award of the Industrial Commission under the workmen’s compensation act.
On the 22d of November, one Roberts, a farm laborer who occupied a house located on a neighboring farm belonging to the Langlade Lumber Company, and who had gathered some pole wood which he desired to use in heating his premises, called at Powell’s farm, where he submitted to Powell a proposal that if the latter would loan him his tractor and assist him in cutting his wood with a certain saw rig belonging to the lumber company, he, the said Roberts, and his son would assist Powell in baling hay. Powell thereupon agreed to the proposal made by Roberts, but, instead of personally aiding, the latter ordered his son to deliver the tractor to Roberts’s premises, and also furnished his own employee, Debroux, to substitute in the work to be done in the sawing of the wood. In the course of the process of sawing the wood on Roberts’s farm, Debroux sustained an injury to one of his fingers, for which the Industrial Commission awarded compensation, and which award was affirmed by the judgment of the circuit court.
The vital question presented herein consists of whether Debroux at the time of the injury was performing farm labor. As a farmer, Powell was not under the workmen’s compensation act, and such act did not apply to either him or Debroux when the latter was performing farm labor. Sub. (3), sec. 102.01, Stats. Powell was not a commercial
This case differs in its facts materially from that of Cayll v. Waukesha G. & E. Co. 172 Wis. 554, 179 N. W. 771. In that case Massino, an employee of a contractor, was, at the request of the gas company, loaned to the latter, and he performed work for it for a period of about two weeks before he was injured. The gas company assumed and paid for Massino’s work performed for it. Massino also each day performed one hour’s work for Cayll, for which the latter compensated him. While working for' the gas company Massino was under the complete control and direction of the gas company and its superintendent and foreman. It was therefore held that the gas company, and not the contractor, was liable for compensation.
■ In the instant case Debroux continued in the employ of Powell, and the latter paid for his services, and such services were performed primarily for the benefit of Powell in order that he might receive assistance from Roberts and his
Whether under the facts of this case Debroux might be considered as an employee of Roberts also, need not be determined in this case, and no opinion is expressed in that regard.
By the Court. — The judgment of the lower court is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions' to enter judgment in plaintiff’s favor. Plaintiff to have costs.