Legal Opinion

Grana v. Summerford

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1961PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The defendant contends his motion for a directed verdict should have been granted because Grana’s negligence was equal to or greater than his and the verdict is not inconsistent.

We consider upon the evidence the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to direct the verdict. A question of fact for the jury on the apportionment of the negligence was presented. On the day of the accident, the weather was clear and Highway EZ, having a black-top surface 18 feet wide, was dry. The road rises to a crest of a hill about 300 feet south of the farm driveway. There were no witnesses…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Wells v. Dairyland Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Guptill v. RoemerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Rodenkirch v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Evjen v. Packer City Transit Line, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Plog v. ZolperWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Jagmin v. Simonds Abrasive Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Riley v. LakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
  3. Martin v. BussertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  4. Merlino v. Mutual Service Casualty InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Lovesee v. Allied Development Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1970

22 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