Legal Opinion

Kruschke v. City of New Richmond

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided June 26, 1990No. 89-1418PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLaROCQUE, J.

This case presents the question whether swinging in a city park is a "recreational activity" under sec. 895.52(1)(g), Stats., so as to immunize the city of New Richmond from liability for injuries sustained by Janice Webb Kruschke. Because we must liberally construe sec. 895.52, we hold that playground swinging is included within its scope and therefore the trial court improperly denied the city's motion for summary judgment.

In her complaint against the city, Kruschke alleged that she was using a swing in a city park when one of the chains broke and she fell to the ground sustaining injuries.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mulder v. Acme-Cleveland Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Kurtz v. City of WaukeshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Heck & Paetow Claim Service, Inc. v. HeckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  4. William B. Tanner Co. v. Estate of FesslerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Hall v. Turtle Lake Lions ClubCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. City of Bellmead v. TorresTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Verdoljak v. Mosinee Paper Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Sievert v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Minnesota Fire & Casualty Insurance v. Paper Recycling of La CrosseWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Law Offices of Pangman & Associates v. StiglerCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991

10 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