Manas v. Hammond
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
Respondents’ cause of action is barred because of their failure to serve notice of injury as required by sec. 330.19 (5), Stats. The exactness of this rule is not affected by the failure to have an administrator of a deceased tort-feasor appointed within the two-year limit. The requirement of sec. 330.19 (5), as to the giving of notice, is a condition which must be complied with, and a failure in that respect leaves a plaintiff in a position where the courts cannot assist him by permitting the commencement of an action. In *287the case of Hoffmann v. Milwaukee E. R. & L. Co. 127 Wis. 76, 106 N.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Gatzow v. BueningWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Relyea v. Tomahawk Paper & Pulp Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Klingbeil v. SaucermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917
- Malloy v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Hoffmann v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Ocampo v. City of RacineWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Schultz v. VickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Voss v. TittelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- Nelson v. American Employers' InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- Asplund v. PalmerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1950
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.