Legal Opinion

Dickens v. Kensmoe

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 27, 1973No. 176PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, C. J.

The question is whether Kensmoe is entitled to contribution against Eau Claire county if he pays 100 percent of the judgment. Eau Claire county claims it is only secondarily liable and therefore is not liable for contribution. It bases its contention upon sec. 81.17, Stats., 1 and it is the construction of this statute that is determinative of this case.

The facts are not in dispute. During the week of June 16, 1969, Eau Claire county’s highway department was blacktopping Highway Q, using its own employees and equipment. When work on Highway Q ended on June 21, 1969, a windrow of blacktop…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Holytz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Hayes v. City of OshkoshWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Schwartz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Brown v. Milwaukee Terminal Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Hay v. City of BarabooWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. VanCleve v. City of MarinetteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Webster v. Klug & SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  3. VanCleve v. City of MarinetteCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API