Legal Opinion

Wisconsin Telephone Co. v. Matson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1950PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The issues for our consideration are primarily these: Does the finding of causal negligence on the part of Nielson rest on mere speculation? Is Matson responsible to third parties for the results of such negligence ? Should there have been a question in the special verdict on plaintiff’s contributory negligence?

There was no witness at the trial who saw a collision between Matson’s truck and the plaintiff’s pole, and Matson submits that the jury’s finding that such a collision occurred rests only on speculation. There is no merit in this contention. Bailey was dozing but was aroused at the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hyer v. City of JanesvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Klein v. BeetenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Cummings v. National Furnace Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
  4. Linden v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Thomas v. Lockwood Oil Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Lambrecht v. Estate of KaczmarczykWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Schimke v. Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. of HermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Wood v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  4. American Family Mutual Insurance v. DobrzynskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Churchill v. BrockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953

11 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