Masanz v. Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance

Appellant submits that there was no evidence to go to the jury on the question of negligence and that Masanz assumed the risk of such negligence as there may have been.

Counsel for plaintiff contends that he is not seeking recovery on the principle of res ipsa loquitur but his oral argument and his brief, in spite of the disclaimer, show dependence upon it. He quotes at length from Dunham v. Wisconsin Gas & Electric Co. (1938), 228 Wis. 250, 280 N. W. 291, which was expressly decided upon that principle. This court has not applied res ipsa loquitur to automobile cases, recognizing that it is a…