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

  1. Crombie v. PowersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Williams v. WilliamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Gvora v. CarlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Northwestern National Insurance v. NemetzCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986
  2. Brunette v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
  3. Siblik v. Motor Transport Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Brunette v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
  5. Shipley v. KruegerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API