Skip to main content

Cargill Feed Division/Cargill Malt v. Labor & Industry Review Commission

WISCTAPPJuly 29, 2010No. No. 2009AP1877Cited 7 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Dykman, Higginbotham, Lundsten
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

The court reversed the Labor and Industry Review Commission's decision finding the employee permanently and totally disabled under the odd-lot doctrine, concluding the Commission applied an incorrect legal standard by requiring employers to disclose claimant's age and disability to prospective employers. The case was remanded for reconsideration under the proper legal standard.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** An employee was injured at work and claimed they were permanently and totally disabled, meaning they couldn't find any job due to their disability. Under Wisconsin's "odd-lot doctrine," injured workers can receive full disability benefits if they can prove their injury makes them unemployable, even if they're not completely unable to work. The Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission agreed with the employee and awarded full disability benefits. **What the Court Decided** The Wisconsin Court of Appeals overturned the Commission's decision and sent the case back for a new review. The court ruled that the Commission used the wrong legal test. Specifically, the Commission incorrectly required employers to tell potential employers about a job applicant's age and disability when determining if the worker was truly unemployable. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling makes it harder for injured workers to prove they deserve full disability benefits. The court clarified that when determining if someone is unemployable due to their work injury, employers don't have to reveal the person's disability to potential employers during the job search process. This could make it more difficult for injured workers to demonstrate they can't find work and qualify for maximum workers' compensation benefits.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.