Garrity v. Manning

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• adopting the Wisconsin rule on dual capacity, which requires examination of the duty breached when assessing whether worker’s suit for damages is permissible
• adopting the ‘Wisconsin rule,” under which a worker who receives workers’ compensation benefits is barred from suing for conduct that amounts to a breach of the corporate employer’s duty
• adopting “Wisconsin rule,” under which worker who receives workers’ compensation benefits is barred from suing individual officers, directors, or stockholders for conduct that amounts to breach of corporate employer’s duty to provide safe workplace
• where duty is nondelegable duty of employer, common law action cannot be maintained because action is actually against employer
• employee may recover against officer or supervisor of employer after collecting workers’ compensation benefits only when officer or supervisor breaches personal duty rather than duty owed primarily to employer
• “As long as a corporate duty is in issue, immunity exists whether the officer fails to discharge it or actually does so in a negligent manner.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).