Schilz v. Walter Kassuba, Inc.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
Plaintiff contends she has alleged the elements of a cause of action upon the attractive-nuisance theory, which permits a child of tender years to recover, under certain circumstances, whether or not she is a trespasser. There is no claim that the four pipes presented a sufficient hazard so that defendant would be liable to plaintiff if she were mature, whether an invitee, licensee, or trespasser.
The attractive-nuisance doctrine had its origin in the 1841 English case of Lynch v. Nurdin.1 Recovery was allowed where a seven-year-old child climbed upon a cart left unattended on the road and was…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. StoutSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Neal, Admr. v. Home Builders, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1953
- McHugh Et Ux. v. Reading Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Schroeder v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1951
- Greene v. DiFazioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Scheeler v. BahrWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Ceplina v. South Milwaukee School BoardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Waters v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1985
- Mikkelson v. RisoviNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1966
- Christians Ex Rel. Davis v. Homestake Enterprises, Ltd.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.