Reuling v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Appellant’s first assignment of error concerns the instruction of the trial court to the jury on the subject of Mrs. Reuling’s contributory negligence. Respondents submit that appellant cannot take advantage of an error in the charge to the jury because it made no objection to the charge when it was given. Such was the common-law rule under which this court decided Getty v. Rountree (1850), 2 Pin. 379, but by sec. 2, ch. 194, Laws of 1874, the legislature permitted exceptions to any portion of the charge to be filed at any time before the close of the term at which the action was tried, with…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- White v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- White v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Krom v. Antigo Gas Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Wells v. PerkinsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- Gundlach v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Savina v. Wisconsin Gas Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Breunig v. American Family InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Hein v. TorgesonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Peissig v. Wisconsin Gas Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
- Cuskey v. McShaneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.