Legal Opinion

Hadjenian v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1958PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.

After all of the testimony had been presented Kelly moved for a directed verdict. In support of its contention that the motion should have been granted, Kelly claims there is no credible evidence to support a jury finding that Bartlein or Barbasiewicz plugged the openings in the coal water heater. Both employees testified that they did not insert the plugs. No witness testified he or she saw anyone insert the plugs. Therefore, Kelly contends, the positive testimony of the plumber and his helper stands unimpeached and the jury verdict is based upon conjecture.

Marcella Hadjenian, a daughter,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ryan v. CameronWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Brown v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Wenzel v. WerchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Millsap v. Central Wisconsin Motor Transport Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1963
  2. Niedbalski v. CuchnaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Korleski v. LaneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Chapman v. KeefeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Millsap v. Central Wisconsin Motor Transport Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API