Wappler v. Schenck
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
From the statement of facts it is evident that there were sharp conflicts in the testimony on various phases of the case. There was the conflict in evidence so common in collision cases as to the rate of -speed of both cars. The testimony that the Heintz car was going at the rate of twenty-five to thirty miles per hour may have been far from the truth, but it cannot be said as a matter of law there is no credible evidence to that effect.
Some testimony located the place of .the accident about the middle of Maryland avenue; other testimony placed it near the east curb line of the street and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ward v. . ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Tesch v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Dahinden v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
- Grimm v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Howe v. CoreyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Millonig v. BakkenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Webster v. KrembsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
- Teas v. EisenlordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
- Roberts v. LisbonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1930
- State v. GravdahlSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.