Legal Opinion

Schmidt v. Leary

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 9, 1934PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFowler, J.

The defendant claims that t-he trial court erred (1) in changing the jury’s finding that the plaintiff’s husband was her agent in driving the car; (2) in not imputing to the plaintiff the negligence of her husband; and (3) in not holding that the plaintiff is barred from recovery because as matter of law the negligence of her husband that contributed proximately to cause the plaintiff’s injuries was at least equal to the negligence of the defendant that so contributed. The plaintiff moves to review (4) the ruling of the court denying her motion to increase the award of damages made by the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Enea v. PfisterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  2. McGuiggan v. HillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Edwards v. KohnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Brown v. HaertelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Risch v. LawheadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Hansberry v. DunnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Heims v. HankeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Canzoneri v. HeckertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Bell v. DuesingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Hoeft v. FriedelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975

19 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