Urban v. Grasser
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWilliam A. Bablitch,j.
¶1. Plaintiff Donald Urban (Urban) appeals a circuit court decision concluding that defendant David Grasser (David) was entitled to recreational immunity under Wis. Stat. *677§ 895.52 (1995-96).1 Urban was crossing David's property to use his boat, which was located on an adjacent property. David's father, Paul Grasser (Paul) owned the adjacent property. Paul held an easement for ingress and egress over David's property pursuant to a written agreement between them and had granted permission to Urban to use David's property in accessing his boat. David's property constituted the only legal means…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Ervin v. City of KenoshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
- LePoidevin Ex Rel. Dye v. WilsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Linville v. City of JanesvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1994
- Verdoljak v. Mosinee Paper Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- Hunter v. McDonaldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Stephen F. Austin State University v. FlynnTexas Supreme Court · 2007
- Atlanta Committee for Olympic Games, Inc. v. HawthorneSupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
- Auman Ex Rel. Auman v. School District of Stanley-BoydWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
- Patti J. Roberts v. T.H.E. Insurance CompanyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2016
- Rintelman v. Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Milwaukee, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2005
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.