Legal Opinion

Fyksen v. Fyksen

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 5, 1954PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurrie, J.

It will be noted from a reading of the foregoing statement of facts that no issue of negligence on the part of the defendant husband was submitted to the jury but instead a question inquiring as to whether defendant had been guilty of wilful and wanton misconduct in the operation of his automobile. The accident occurred in the state of Ohio and, therefore, is subject to the substantive law of Ohio, not that of Wisconsin.

Sec. 6308-6, 4 — A Page, Ohio General Code, Anno., pro- ' vides as follows:

“The owner, operator, or person responsible for the operation of a motor vehicle shall not be liable…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Universal Concrete Pipe Co. v. BassettOhio Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Helleren v. DixonOhio Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Ulrich, a Minor v. MassieOhio Court of Appeals · 1951

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brunke v. PoppWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Hansen v. HansenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Scholle v. Home Mutual Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API