Legal Opinion

Schulz v. CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & PR CO.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 5, 1952PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

260 Wis. 541 (1952)

SCHULZ, Respondent,

vs.

CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL & PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.[*]

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

January 7, 1952.

February 5, 1952.

For the appellant there were briefs by Bender, Trump, McIntyre, Trimborn & Godfrey, attorneys, and Rodger S. Trump of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Rodger S. Trump.

For the respondent there was a brief by Curran & Curran of Mauston, and oral argument by Charles P. Curran and Thomas J. Curran.

BROWN, J.

Sec. 192.29 (5), Stats., directs the warning which must be placed at every railway-highway crossing.

"Danger…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bengston v. EstesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Schulz v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Wisconsin Central Transportation Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2004
  2. Kemp v. Wisconsin Electric Power Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Kurer v. Parke, Davis & Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
  4. Hoffmann v. Wisconsin Electric Power Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Dombeck v. CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & PR CO.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1964

7 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