Legal Opinion

Geyer v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1939PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFowler, J.

The defendant makes several assignments of error but under the view we take of the evidence we need consider only one. That one is that the negligence of the plaintiff was as matter of law as great or greater than that of the defendant. Hence no recovery can be had under the comparative-negligence statute, sec. 331.045, which denies recovery in such case.

The plaintiff sues to recover for injuries sustained in a collision between a bus of the defendant and the automobile she was driving at the intersection of West Highland boulevard and Thirty-Seventh street in Milwaukee. The plaintiff was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Zenner v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Goldmann v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Heintz v. SchenckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. De Baker v. AustinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Kasper v. KocherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Driessen v. ModerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Evanich v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Augustin v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Transport Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1951

7 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