Legal Opinion

Koperski v. Hoeft

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 9, 1923PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rosenberry, J.'

There were no witnesses to the accident except the plaintiff and the defendant. All the evidence tending to show negligence on the part of defendant is the testimony of the plaintiff, which is as follows:

“When I got to Fond du Lac avenue I waited at the curb for my chance to cross. There was a machine about 100 feet to my left. I let that machine go by. Another machine turned in on Fond du Lac from Walnut so that gave me plenty of time to cross the street. .It turned into Walnut from my left'. It was' over a half block away *283which gave me a chance to cross, and when I got as far…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hansen v. StorandtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. MacCaux v. PrinclWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Dauplaise v. Yellow Taxicab Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Schultz v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Meyer v. Mutual Service Casualty InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961

5 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