Legal Opinion

Kauth v. Landsverk

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1937PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed March 9, 1937:

Fowler, J.

The appellants claim that upon the preceding statement of facts the impleaded husband is not liable for contribution because, (1) the principle of respondeat superior, which is the basis of the judgment for contribution, does not render the husband liable for the results of his agent’s (his daughter’s) acts unless his agent (his daughter) is herself liable for those results; and his agent (his daughter) is not so liable in the instant case because the plaintiff mother cannot sue her minor daughter; (2) the finding of the jury that the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Walker v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Cleary v. EckartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Sommerfield v. FluryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Zutter v. O'ConnellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Scory v. LaFaveWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Guerriero v. U-Drive-It Co. of NJNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  2. Switzer v. WeinerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Schroeder v. LongeneckerDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1947
  4. Hallmark Insurance v. Crary Enterprises, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  5. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. v. Phoenix Indemnity CompanyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953

2 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