Gustavson v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, C. J.
Gustavson raises two questions: (1) Is the evidence sufficient to sustain the verdict that he was negligent for his own safety; and (2) did the court abuse its discretion in not granting a new trial for errors in the form of the verdict and in the instructions and in the interest of justice?
Taking these assignments of error in their reverse order, we hold Gustavson waived his right to complain concerning the form of verdict and the inadequacy of the instructions because he did not object prior to the jury’s return of its verdict. For form of verdict, see: Fondow v. Milwaukee Electric Railway…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Savina v. Wisconsin Gas Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Menge v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Mainz v. LundWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Spleas v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Baierl v. HinshawWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Victorson v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Buel v. La Crosse Transit Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
- Turner v. Bounce Back LLCCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2019