Connell v. Luck
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.
The sole question to be determined is whether or not sec. 85.61, Stats., applies to a farmer’s tractor being used upon his own farm. This statute reads as follows:
“No vehicle of the tractor type shall be operated unless the driving wheels are protected by suitable fenders.”
The plaintiff contends that this is a plain, simple, and unambigous statute. It is conceded that, as a general rule, where a statute is plain and unambiguous no interpretation or construction thereof is necessary. A reading of the statute immediately raises several questions: What is a vehicle? What is a vehicle of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. McGrael v. PhelpsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Pfingsten v. PfingstenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
- Rice v. Ashland CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- State ex rel. Husting v. Board of State CanvassersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- Neacy v. Board of SupervisorsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Alberte v. Anew Health Care Services, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- State Ex Rel. Reynolds v. NusbaumWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Worachek v. Stephenson Town School DistrictWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Green Bay Drop Forge Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Kearney & Trecker Corp. v. Department of RevenueWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.