Steeno v. Wolff
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, C. J.
The affidavits and exhibits show that the grate in question was one and five-tenths feet wide by four feet long and six inches of it was upon the defendants’ property. It covered an opening in the sidewalk at the point where a basement window was located in the defendants’ building. The grate was held in place by five iron prongs or straps extending from its outer rim over the edge of the sidewalk. One of such prongs projected one to one and one-half inches above the level of the sidewalk and it was this prong in which the plaintiff caught a strap of her shoe, causing her to fall upon the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Laughnan v. GriffithsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Brown v. Milwaukee Terminal Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
- Weber v. City of HurleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- McChain v. City of Fond Du LacWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Miller v. Welworth TheatresWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Peppas v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Moutry v. American Mutual Liability InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Hei v. City of DurandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Breiby v. Department of AdministrationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
- Hei v. City of DurandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.