Legal Opinion
Lepak v. Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided June 3, 1952PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.
It appears to us that the statement made by the learned trial judge in support of his order directing a verdict clearly and correctly states the reason why plaintiff may not recover in this action. He said:
“The undisputed testimony is to the effect that Lepak had worked on several occasions around pea vineries; although he had not seen this particular truck unload on previous occasions, he had seen dump trucks unload, and he knew that a part of the operation consisted of a jerking movement after the load of peas starts to fall — starts to slide off. And knowing that, and being in the truck,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Crombie v. PowersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- Williams v. WilliamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Gvora v. CarlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
3Cited by5 opinions
- Northwestern National Insurance v. NemetzCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986
- Brunette v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
- Siblik v. Motor Transport Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- Brunette v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
- Shipley v. KruegerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953