Fenske v. Kramp Construction Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWickhem, J.
It is plaintiffs’ first contention that the official warning, whereby Marathon county disclosed to those using the highway that the road was closed and could not be traveled, upon penalty of fine, was for the protection of Marathon county, and that the disregard of this sign by the plaintiffs would not constitute contributory negligence as a matter of law.
Sub. (6), sec. 82.04, Stats. 1929, vests in the county highway commissioner the power, in his discretion, to stop travel on any highway in process of construction or repair, by posting notices forbidding such travel at each end of said…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Willette v. Rhinelander Paper Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Griswold v. CampWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
- Shawano County v. Froemming Bros.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
- Lloyd v. PughWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- Ashton v. P. F. Coughlin Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hanson v. BaileySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Brown v. HaertelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Skybrock v. Concrete Construction Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Dornack v. Barton Construction CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- Trantham v. GilliozMissouri Court of Appeals · 1961
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.