Legal Opinion

Enea v. Pfister

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1923PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.

Appellant’s first contention is that there was no evidence in support of. the finding of the jury that the driver of the automobile was negligent in his operation and management thereof at the time of the injury. The evidence as to how the accident happened is very meager. A witness, Camille Tralonge, testified that she saw the little girl coming across the street, and the truck coming from the south on Milwaukee street. She was unable to testify as to the rate of speed at which the truck was coming, but testified that it did not slow down before striking the little girl, and that it r^n…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Potts v. . PardeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. West v. KernOregon Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Dierks v. NewsomCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
  4. Behrens v. Hawkeye Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  5. Fransen v. Kellogg Toasted Corn Flake Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1921

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Hansberry v. DunnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Archer v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Schmidt v. LearyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Zurn v. WhatleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Kruse v. WeigandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API