Legal Opinion

Linville v. City of Janesville

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1994No. 91-1099PublishedCited by 51 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliam A. Bablitch, J.

The defendants City of Janesville (City) and the City's paramedics 1 seek review of a published court of appeals' decision 2 which denied them immunity from liability under the recreational immunity statute 3 for claims arising from a drowning at the City's pond. The court of appeals determined that Kelly Linville and her four-year-old son David were not engaged in a recreational activity at the time of David's drowning. Accordingly, the court determined the City and the paramedics were not immune under the statute. We disagree with the court of appeals that Kelly and David were not engaged…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Sambs v. City of BrookfieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Ervin v. City of KenoshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Shannon v. ShannonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Gonzalez Ex Rel. Bichler v. City of FranklinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Copeland v. LarsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970

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

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. Lodl v. Progressive Northern InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Ronald Slade v. Board of School DirCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
  3. Verdoljak v. Mosinee Paper Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Schmidt v. Northern States Power Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Meyer v. School District of ColbyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999

46 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