Legal Opinion
Smith v. City of Jefferson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided November 3, 1959PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCurrie, J.
Counsel for the plaintiffs contend that the allegations of the complaint are sufficient to spell out a cause of action on any one of the following four theories:(1) Attractive nuisance.(2) Actual nuisance.(3) Liability under sec. 81.15, Stats., for a sidewalk defect.(4) Liability under sec. 270.58, Stats., for negligent acts performed in good faith by a city officer.
Attractive Nuisance.
The liability for an attractive nuisance is grounded upon negligence and not nuisance. See concurring opinion in Flamingo v. Waukesha (1952), 262 Wis. 219, 55 N. W. (2d) 24, and authorities cited therein. In…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Reed v. City of MadisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Russe v. RogersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Britten v. City of Eau ClaireWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- Smith v. Congregation of St. RoseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Laffey v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Holytz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Kobelinski v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
- Fiala v. VoightWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Harte v. City of Eagle RiverWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Rogers v. City of OconomowocWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.