Legal Opinion

Bushman v. Tomek

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 13, 1936PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, C. J.

In this court the appellant, Farmers Mutual, contends that there was no proof to sustain a finding of negligence on the part of Reynolds, the driver of the Noble car; that a new trial should be granted because the verdict is fatally defective and because of errors in instructions to the jury. We shall not attempt to set out all of the facts in this most unfortunate accident, which resulted in the death of one person and the serious injury of several others.

On the question of Reynolds’ negligence and the question raised in connection therewith, we have carefully examined the record and we find…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Christiansen v. Ætna Casualty & Surety Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brochu v. TaylorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Upton v. TatroWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Locke v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Kitchenmaster v. Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1946

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API