Legal Opinion

Truesdill v. Roach

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 1, 1960PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The first issue is whether the mother is a necessary party plaintiff with the father in bringing an action for the wrongful death of their son. Sec. 331.04 (1), Stats., provides that an action for wrongful death may be brought either by the personal representative of the deceased person or by the person to whom the amount recovered belongs. Under the facts of this case the parents of the deceased are beneficiaries of the recovery for the wrongful death and also for additional damages for loss of society and companionship. Sec. 331.04 (2) and (4).

Sec. 260.12, Stats., provides that parties to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Brown v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Pierce v. ConnersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
  3. Patitucci v. GerhardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Hansberry v. DunnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  5. McMillan v. Spider Lake Saw Mill & Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Kania v. Airborne Freight Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Heck & Paetow Claim Service, Inc. v. HeckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Nichols v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Chart v. DvorakWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Day v. Allstate Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2011

24 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