Legal Opinion
Colla v. Mandella
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided November 8, 1955PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.
Defendants contend first that by her pleading plaintiff is precluded from the right to rely upon the doctrine. In addition to allegations contained in her complaint setting forth facts calling for its application and asserting those facts as a separate ground of negligence, she made the following allegations upon information and belief:
“The defendant, Domenic Mandella, left his said truck parked and stopped in said alley on said incline and went into his adjoining home, leaving said truck unattended; despite the said defendant’s knowledge at said time and place that his two minor sons, age…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Musbach v. Wisconsin Chair Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Ryan v. Zweck-Wollenberg Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
- Lipsky v. C. Reiss Coal Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
- Koehler v. Thiensville State BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
- Hughes v. Rentschler Floral Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
3Cited by8 opinions
- Colla v. MandellaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
- Turk v. H. C. Prange Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Chapin v. RogersNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1969
- Welch v. NeisiusWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Martínez Mattei v. MontañezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.