Schmit v. Sekach
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtGordon, J.
Negligence of Mr. Sekaeh as to Lookout.
The principal issue presented upon this appeal is the correctness of the plaintiff’s contention that Mr. Sekaeh was negligent as to lookout as a matter of law. It is urged that the jury’s negative answer to that question must be changed. In our opinion, this contention is not meritorious.
The appellant relies principally upon three prior decisions of this court to demonstrate that there was negligence as to lookout on the part of Mr. Sekach as a matter of law. The first of such cases is Bailey v. Zwirowski (1954), 268 Wis. 208, 67 N. W. (2d) 262, which…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Puhl v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Niedbalski v. CuchnaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Oelke v. EarleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
- Ashley v. American Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Nehls v. NehlsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lutz v. Shelby Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Lievrouw v. RothCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1990
- Payne v. Bilco Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
- Menge v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- State v. SpragginWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.