Legal Opinion

Bear v. Kenosha County

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1963PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The defendant contends the judgment is not supported by the evidence mainly because all three of the plaintiffs’ experts erroneously assumed that before the taking the plaintiffs had free and uncontrolled access to Highway 50 and, therefore, their opinions of the value should be disregarded. If no right of access existed, the opinion of value based upon such assumption might be disregarded under the rule of Pressed Steel Tank Co. v. Industrial Comm. (1949), 255 Wis. 333, 38 N. W. (2d) 354, and Branch v. Oconto County (1961), 13 Wis. (2d) 595, 109 N. W. (2d) 105. However, the record does not…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Watson v. Milwaukee & Madison Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Estate of EannelliWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Stolze v. Manitowoc Terminal Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Birdsall v. FraenzelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Dabareiner v. WeisflogWisconsin Supreme Court · 1948

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. AlbrightCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980
  2. Weeden v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Narloch v. State, Department of TransportationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Kocinski v. Home Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988
  5. National Auto Truckstops, Inc. v. Department of TransportationWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003

19 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