Legal Opinion

Switzer v. Detroit Investment Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 1925PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEschweiler, J.

While those responsible for the operation of passenger elevators in buildings such as this are classed as common carriers so far as the extraordinary degree of care required of them by the law is concerned (Ferguson v. Truax, 136 Wis. 637, 118 N. W. 251), yet here plainly the plaintiff could not be considered a passenger in any sense of that term, and therefore the allegations of the complaint in that regard are not applicable to the facts here shown. In his complaint plaintiff did not assert that there was on the part of the operator that which is designated in this jurisdiction as gross…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Altman v. AronsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
  2. Chunn v. City & Suburban R. Co. of WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  3. Bolin v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Tesch v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Astin v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Butts v. WardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Cushman v. PerkinsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1968
  3. Britton v. HoytWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Gohn v. Butte Hotel Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Wilmet v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1939

5 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